No Expectation of Privacy

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Tom Bryant, Feb 11, 2010.

  1. Thinkingstuff

    Thinkingstuff
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,169
    Likes Received:
    0
    All your information has been documented. We see that you have an issue with your freely elected government and now you must wait for 10 minutes and the local authorities will pick you up for questioning. have a nice day.
     
  2. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you don't want your location known you must remove the battery from your cell phone.

    If your car has onstar installed you can be tracked even if you don't subscribe. I suspect your engine can be shut down by the company while you are driving.
     
  3. Tom Bryant

    Tom Bryant
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    4,439
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thought you guys were the big civil liberties guys... guess it just depends on whose justice dep't is doing the snooping.
     
  4. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    As long as it is understood that we are being snooped it should not matter. Allah Akbar! Take that, federal snooper!
     
  5. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,273
    Likes Received:
    777

    Wow What a let down to the liberals. Their savior has betrayed them.
     
  6. blackbird

    blackbird
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    11,898
    Likes Received:
    2
    NAZI Germany's Gestapo would be envious!!!!! No more paper work---get in---out---we have our man!!!! Personally, though, if I were a Gestapo agent---I'd think that a cell phone would take all the fun out of snooping and nosein' around!!!!
     
  7. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    Whassup wi' dis? :eek:


    I could have sworn Obama, as a senator, was against electronic eavesdropping.


    Oh!!!! I get it!!!

    It's OK to snoop on law abiding citizens, but not foreign terrorists.

    Silly me. Whatever was I thinking!!!!!
     
    #8 carpro, Feb 12, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 12, 2010
  8. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is no constitutional right to privacy except in one's home. All the other sorts of privacy stem from case law and no one on this list except myself seems to "believe in" case law.
     
  9. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    And you say that you are a libertarian?
     
  10. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Say what?

    I don't have any secrets except for inside my house and private conversations outside. I'm not afraid to use my real name even on this list. Anything on the web and anything that goes over a cell phone can be snooped by anyone.

    I don't have to like the laws. As a Christian and a Libertarian, I only have to live and work within their framework.
     
  11. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are largely correct. MOST of the folks here don't think case law has anything to do with the law of the land. That fact shows ignorance of our civil government.
     
  12. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, he's not.

    He largely follows the union party line (Democrat). He also believes all of our tax/income info should be published in newspapers (not sure what you'd call that, besides "ridiculous.")

    My view is this: When I encounter a "gray area," I default to individual freedom, and smaller gov't. That's why the Patriot Act disturbed me. That's one of many reasons this legislation is, quite frankly, stupid.

    But, unfortunately...those of us who value individual freedom and liberty are quickly becoming the minority. Not to mention that many folks are willing to sacrifice freedom and liberty if it allows them to take a "pot shot" at the "enemy party."

    Sad, it is.
     
  13. mcdirector

    mcdirector
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    8,292
    Likes Received:
    10
    It's easy to say now that you, I, we don't have any secrets because we are still a relatively free society, but history has taught us that fact can change with an election, a law passed, a takeover. Once one of our behaviors (like going to church, praying, criticizing the President) is outlawed, we might well have a secret and want some personal discretion in who we share it with.
     
  14. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    114
    :applause: ...................


    :applause: .....................................
     
  15. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    I disagree and so do others:

    http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000757.html

    The right to keep mail private is in the original constitution. At the time there were no cell phones, internet, etc. That the original constitution specifically says that mail should be kept private, and that mail was a primary means of communication, says quite a lot.
     
  16. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very good insight.

    Additionally there are many conversations which concern matters which are not illegal but require privacy such as business trade secrets.
     
  17. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting. It should be a simple to amend title 18 if Congress cares.

    How dare anyone tell me which political party I (may) support <G>.
     
  18. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amend Title 18 how - specifically?

    What are you talking about?

    You know there are no mind readers here.
     
  19. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    See posts # 10 and 12 above. Posters claim that I am not a Libertarian.

    See http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000757.html on this page. It notes that title 18 forbids govt snooping in people's mail (to bad that this has been universally ignored) and that the intent of the section in title 18 should be, by case law, transferred and applied to all forms of electronic communication.

    Well, there has been specific legislations prohibiting repeating private conversations by radio transmissions and this has been expanded by specifically banning the manufacture of receivers that may be tuned to cell phone frequencies.

    But the OP was about using cell phone signals for locating the phone by triangulation. For years police have planted radio beacons on suspicious cars and using the signal for triangulating the position of a car. Far as I know there has never been a legal decision against this practice and thus by inference using cell phone signals for the same purpose should be constitutional.
     

Share This Page

Loading...