WARNING: Please Read 1st Post as I explain what these choices are in greater detail.

Good day fellow Vizzed folk.

Its been a while since I've created a thread and I think this is a good topic for discussion.

Anyways I've been reading through my law books and reading cases involving the 4th Amendment and Right to Privacy. When I got to one particular case involving whether a person has an expectation of privacy when using a phone booth (to which the answer is yes, but that is another debate for another time), I thought about whether a person should have a privacy right when using a cell phone since cell phones are popular in todays modern society. So I'm going to try and make an argument for both poll choices so they are clear and let you the Vizzed community make the final decision.

Choice 1: A person who is using a cell phone has a right to privacy as that person believes that his call is a private one regardless if he is talking in public. Society recognizes that cell phones like regular phones are a tool used for private communication and society is willing to give a person a right to privacy when they are using a cell phone.

Choice 2: A person who is using a cell phone doesn't have a right to privacy as that person is talking in a public area where everyone can listen to what the person is saying on the phone. Unlike past cases which dealt with right to privacy in areas with physical barriers such as a house, phone booth, or car; a person talking on a cell phone doesn't have any barriers to shield him from eavesdropping by the public; thus these past cases which granted the right to privacy don't apply to cell phones.

Choice 3: A person who is using a cell phone doesn't have a right to privacy if he is talking in a public area; but if that person is attempting to make his public call a private one then he has a right to privacy. If that person attempts to talk in a softer, whisper-like voice, he takes his call in a corner so that people don't see him talking, or if he is texting instead of talking; then a right to privacy should be attached to those and similar instances when the person attempts to shield his call from unsuspected eavesdroppers.

Hopefully I made things clearer for my choices and can't wait to see what people think. Also feel free to explain your reasoning for what choice you picked (after all this is a debate thread).

In my region, if you don't have a password on your phone, an officer can look through your phone without having to ask.

I oppose this, and feel as if the typings and histories of a cell phone are part of one's private life, and not the technology that holds it. Cell phones are the property of the owner, not the carrier, or the government, and therefore the contents of it should be left to that person.

Cell phones are indeed a tool for private communication, and should be treated the same inside and outside a home, unfortunately with things like the XBONE and laptops, having people listening and seeing you in your home and looking into those communications, it seems as though governments treat privacy as a privilege, and not anything near a right, as it should be.

Eavesdropping is going to happen, almost consistently unintentionally, but intentional eavesdropping crosses a sort of line, as those people are trying to gain information from the conversation, which goes against the point of privacy, whereas people on the street hearing a man talk on his phone isn't something that people listen into out of respect for their privacy.

To avoid such things, of course talking in a corner or something would not only be more courteous, but safer for the confidentiality of their conversation. People do of course have the right to privacy, but unintentional listening in can't be helped, but intentional listening in can, and breaches it because those responsible for listening purposefully have the intent to use the conversation as anything other than a private meeting between two people, which is what it is, and it violates that 4th Amendment and whatnot.