http://www.physorg.com/news85335082.html

As we discover more and more examples of high-tech surveillance devices, it"s increasingly clear that existing law as well as our notions of proper privacy boundaries are becoming inadequate. Because the law is concerned with things like what is required to do a lawful search, or what constitutes an unreasonable search, much of the challenge is actually what is meant by a search. A recent Reason magazine cover story looks at the way technology is making this a difficult question to answer. For example, it"s generally accepted that if you"re pulled over for running a stop sign, the police officer isn"t allowed to start rummaging through your trunk looking for your drugs. But, consider technology that allows someone to scan a door handle to see if there"s any drug residue on it. Some courts have ruled that the use of technology that"s only able to turn up illicit material does not constitute a search, and thus a use of such a scanner would not be in violation of rules against illegal search. Of course, just because the technology only turns up evidence of illegal activity does not mean it couldn"t be abused. If a law enforcement body decided to use the technology selectively against, say, a certain religious group or race, they could easily use it as a means of harassment. If the use of this technology isn"t classified as search, then the law doesn"t have much to say about how they can be used