Does the knowing exposure doctrine adequately define expectations of privacy that are

reasonable from a societal point of view? Provide one reason why it does and one reason
why it does not. 

0 pts
The learner did not provide any reasons for why the knowing exposure doctrine does or does not
adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does:

people should not expect privacy in public; 

police cannot avoid observing public activities; 

if police were required to provide a justification for observance of public activities it would be
difficult to get investigations off the ground.

does not:

people do not expect to have their public activities observed for long periods of time or to have
them recorded--to some extent they expect anonymity in public; 

knowledge or suspicion that one is being observed by the government without any justification
will chill innocent behavior; 

police will misuse information they obtain.

1 pt
The learner provided EITHER a reason the knowing exposure doctrine does, OR a reason it
does not, adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy, but did not address both sides
of the argument.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does:

people should not expect privacy in public; 

police cannot avoid observing public activities; 

if police were required to provide a justification for observance of public activities it would be
difficult to get investigations off the ground.

does not:

people do not expect to have their public activities observed for long periods of time or to have
them recorded--to some extent they expect anonymity in public; 

knowledge or suspicion that one is being observed by the government without any justification
will chill innocent behavior; 

police will misuse information they obtain.

2 pts
The learner provided BOTH a reason the knowing exposure doctrine does AND a reason it does
not adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does:

people should not expect privacy in public; 

police cannot avoid observing public activities; 

if police were required to provide a justification for observance of public activities it would be
difficult to get investigations off the ground.

does not:

people do not expect to have their public activities observed for long periods of time or to have
them recorded--to some extent they expect anonymity in public; 

knowledge or suspicion that one is being observed by the government without any justification
will chill innocent behavior; 

police will misuse information they obtain.

Does the general public use doctrine adequately define expectations of privacy that are
reasonable from a societal point of view? Provide one reason why it does and one reason
why it does not. 

0 pts
The learner did not provide any reasons for why the general public use doctrine does or does not
adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does:  people should not expect privacy from the use of everyday technology like binoculars; 

police should not be prevented from using technology that private citizens can use with impunity.

does not: 

police should not be allowed to look inside houses without some sort of justification; 

technology "in general public use" will only expand as powerful technology becomes cheaper; 

it's too difficult to figure out what technology is in general public use--e.g., is a satellite camera in
general public use, given Google Earth?

1 pt
The learner provided EITHER a reason the general public use doctrine does OR a reason it does
not adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy, but did not address both sides of the
argument.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does:  people should not expect privacy from the use of everyday technology like binoculars; 

police should not be prevented from using technology that private citizens can use with impunity.

does not: 

police should not be allowed to look inside houses without some sort of justification; 

technology "in general public use" will only expand as powerful technology becomes cheaper; 

it's too difficult to figure out what technology is in general public use--e.g., is a satellite camera in
general public use, given Google Earth?

2 pts
The learner provided BOTH a reason the general public use doctrine does AND a reason it does
not adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does:  people should not expect privacy from the use of everyday technology like binoculars; 

police should not be prevented from using technology that private citizens can use with impunity.

does not: 

police should not be allowed to look inside houses without some sort of justification; 

technology "in general public use" will only expand as powerful technology becomes cheaper; 

it's too difficult to figure out what technology is in general public use--e.g., is a satellite camera in
general public use, given Google Earth?

Does the contraband-specific doctrine adequately define expectations of privacy that are

reasonable from a societal point of view? Provide one reason why it does and one reason
why it does not. 

0 pts
The learner did not provide any reasons for why the contraband-specific doctrine does or does
not adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does:

a dog and other contraband-specific technology only detects contraband, so nothing that can
legitimately be kept private is discovered by such technology; 

this technology can protect police by alerting them to hidden weapons.

does not: 

a dog sniff of luggage or police pointing a device at a person is intrusive; 

these devices are unlikely to be accurate and so will occasionally detect something other than
contraband; 

it is oppressive to have police cruising streets aiming such devices at house and cars.

1 pt
The learner provided EITHER a reason the contraband-specific doctrine does OR a reason it
does not adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy, but did not address both sides of
the argument.
Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does:

a dog and other contraband-specific technology only detects contraband, so nothing that can
legitimately be kept private is discovered by such technology; 

this technology can protect police by alerting them to hidden weapons.

does not: 

a dog sniff of luggage or police pointing a device at a person is intrusive; 

these devices are unlikely to be accurate and so will occasionally detect something other than
contraband; 

it is oppressive to have police cruising streets aiming such devices at house and cars.

2 pts
The learner provided BOTH a reason the contraband-specific doctrine does AND a reason it
does not adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does:

a dog and other contraband-specific technology only detects contraband, so nothing that can
legitimately be kept private is discovered by such technology; 

this technology can protect police by alerting them to hidden weapons.

does not: 

a dog sniff of luggage or police pointing a device at a person is intrusive; 

these devices are unlikely to be accurate and so will occasionally detect something other than
contraband; 

it is oppressive to have police cruising streets aiming such devices at house and cars.

Does the assumption of risk doctrine adequately define expectations of privacy that are

reasonable from a societal point of view? Provide one reason why it does and one reason
why it does not. 
0 pts
The learner did not provide any reasons for why the assumption of risk doctrine does or does not
adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does: 

people know most of their information is held by third parties and should not expect it to be
private; 

statutes can provide sufficient protection of privacy.

does not: 

people surrender their information to third parties with the understanding that it will be used only
for a specific purpose (like making bank transactions), not transmitted to the police; 

the doctrine makes it too easy for police to create digital dossiers on individuals; 

people may be deterred from engaging in everyday transactions like communicating and
purchasing certain types of products if they know government can get their information without
any justification.

1 pt
The learner provided EITHER a reason the assumption of risk doctrine does OR a reason it does
not adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy, but did not address both sides of the
argument.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does: 

people know most of their information is held by third parties and should not expect it to be
private; 

statutes can provide sufficient protection of privacy.

does not: 

people surrender their information to third parties with the understanding that it will be used only
for a specific purpose (like making bank transactions), not transmitted to the police; 
the doctrine makes it too easy for police to create digital dossiers on individuals; 

people may be deterred from engaging in everyday transactions like communicating and
purchasing certain types of products if they know government can get their information without
any justification.

2 pts
The learner provided BOTH a reason the assumption of risk doctrine does AND a reason it does
not adequately define reasonable expectations of privacy.

Examples of reasons why it does or does not:

does: 

people know most of their information is held by third parties and should not expect it to be
private; 

statutes can provide sufficient protection of privacy.

does not: 

people surrender their information to third parties with the understanding that it will be used only
for a specific purpose (like making bank transactions), not transmitted to the police; 

the doctrine makes it too easy for police to create digital dossiers on individuals; 

people may be deterred from engaging in everyday transactions like communicating and
purchasing certain types of products if they know government can get their information without
any justification.