pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD |  Punish the Snitchers
Such a bill removes any incentive for the phone companies, or any other communications company, to actively cooperate with government at any level for legitimate law enforcement purposes.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
Yauch
join:2005-06-24 | I would just assume that a court order would be sufficent incentive. |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
 ·Comcast
| said by Yauch  :I would just assume that a court order would be sufficent incentive. It would be... but if the legal climate exists in which phone companies will be punished for cooperating with law enforcement, they will fight such orders to the hilt.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
KraziJoe
join:2006-09-08
Alexandria, VA
·Comcast
| said by pnh102 :said by Yauch :I would just assume that a court order would be sufficent incentive. It would be... but if the legal climate exists in which phone companies will be punished for cooperating with law enforcement, they will fight such orders to the hilt. That's just absurd. The talk of lawsuits is because the Telco's just handed over the information without a Court Order.
The FBI/NSA just showed up and said gimme information and they did. THAT is the problem and that is why the people are suing... |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| said by KraziJoe :The FBI/NSA just showed up and said gimme information and they did. THAT is the problem and that is why the people are suing... The government has been doing this sort of thing for years. The only time people started "having a problem" with it was when it was determined that "having a problem" could be useful for political attacks.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
CrazyFingers
join:2003-10-01
Columbia, MO
| Quite sensible, citizen
"The Responsible Electronic Surveillance That Is Overseen, Reviewed and Effective Act of 2007"
This is an addition to the "Serious Protection of Youth" act of 2005, which was an addition to the "Distributed Universal Management Bureaucracy" initiative of 2003.
As we all know, both of these laws would never be possible without the "Justice, Equality, and Safety Update System" program that was put into place in early 2001.
I for one am glad our government has the interests of its citizens at the top of its priority list. This is why I am urging my congressman to support the "Socially Conservative Reduced Employment Withholding Mission for Everyone" act of 2007.
You should too!
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... |
|
CrazyFingers
join:2003-10-01
Columbia, MO
| reply to pnh102
Re: Punish the Snitchers
Or when it was determined that their actions were...you know...
Illegal.
I think you'll agree that this is the main problem in America today, we have all these "laws" that just get in the way of law enforcement. If only we could remove all these so-called "laws" that provide "protection" to our citizen's "civil rights", it would be so much easier to protect the people of the United States. After all, America was founded on the ideals of "complete safety from any bad thing", and if you read your constitution, you'll see that your personal safety is guaranteed 100% of the time under every possible circumstance. I still don't understand where all these smelly hippies get this whacko idea that they have "rights", I've looked all over the constitution and I don't see that anywhere.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... |
|
paulhaskew
Unoffical Dominos Spokesman
join:2002-01-10
Vancouver, WA
clubs: | reply to CrazyFingers
Re: Quite sensible, citizen
LOL!!! Love the names... |
|
Cogdis
join:2007-03-26
Floral Park, NY
 ·Verizon FIOS
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Teleblend
| reply to pnh102
Re: Punish the Snitchers
said by pnh102 :The government has been doing this sort of thing for years. The only time people started "having a problem" with it was when it was determined that "having a problem" could be useful for political attacks. Regardless of how long they've been doing it, it's still illegal. The constitution is the highest law of this country. Once we turn it into a guideline, there is no longer a basis for our government. It's called a slippery slope... |
|
NewMariner
join:2005-06-24
| said by Cogdis :said by pnh102 :The government has been doing this sort of thing for years. The only time people started "having a problem" with it was when it was determined that "having a problem" could be useful for political attacks. Regardless of how long they've been doing it, it's still illegal. The constitution is the highest law of this country. Once we turn it into a guideline, there is no longer a basis for our government. It's called a slippery slope... I believe it is a guideline, or else we wouldnt have amendments... |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to CrazyFingers
Re: Quite sensible, citizen
Of course... these bills were opposed by groups including the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.
»news.google.com/news?sourceid=na···N&tab=wn
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
CrazyFingers
join:2003-10-01
Columbia, MO | Don't joke about the MILF. They are known to employ highly trained cougars to hunt down dissidents and eat them alive.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... |
|
Titus Pullo
I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26 | Wow
sad commentary when a story like this receives far less attention than, say, "the mac store is down" forum links. I think there's a lesson or something here . . .
-- |
|
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Los Angeles, CA
 ·DSL EXTREME
·Brand X Internet
·RoadRunner Cable
·Vonage
4 edits | reply to CrazyFingers
Uhm HELLO??? McFly???
I see that you support the police state, where our freedoms are flushed down the toilet for 'convenience'. Despite the bu**shit you've been told (and you apparently took-hook, line and sinker!), this has nothing to do with fighting terrorism! There are plenty of ways for law enforcement to get whatever they want or need. This is simply a way for them to be able to do "fishing expeditions". See, to keep the govt. from infringing on the rights of its citizens, there are safeguards in place to protect us. Law enforcement needs to go to court and convince a judge that any intrusion into the private life of its law abiding citizens is outweighed by the public benefits of doing so. It's not a complicted thing to do, but it IS an important check. This system has served us well through the centuries, including MANY wars! Now, you and your ilk seem Hell bent on flushing our protected rights and freedoms down the toilet! Maybe you are so paranoid that you need the govt. to 'protect' you, but unlike you, I believe that the average citizen needs protection from govt. intrusions more then we need protection from terrorists.
See, the way our political system works best is when the citizens have a healthy DISTRUST of the govt. WE are the fourth branch of the government-it's up to us the citizens to keep corruption in check! Your way of blind: "yup, yup, yup" obediance puts us on a slippery slope towards fascism!
Look, if you're SO concerned about your "personal safety" then get your state and city to put more cops on the streets of our cities and towns. You're MUCH MORE LIKELY to be injured or killed by a robber, gang member or drunk driver then a terrorist. Police walking the beat in our neighborhoods are FAR MORE EFFECTIVE in preventing crime then some big computer bugging all our phone calls and emails is! |
|
Cogdis
join:2007-03-26
Floral Park, NY
·Verizon FIOS
·RoadRunner Cable
·Teleblend
| reply to NewMariner
Re: Punish the Snitchers
Constitution: fundamental law: law determining the fundamental political principles of a government.
If the constitution is amended, that amendment becomes LAW.
Nobody can choose which laws they want to follow. Not even the president. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest
|  retroactive immunity?
it's unbelievable that telcos are pushing for retroactive immunity. to me, that they are lobbying for it is a straightforward admission of guilt.
add to that the fact that we have to introduce a bill to enforce the law that has been in place for YEARS and it is clear that telcos are guilty. just pay the fine and go bankrupt. you deserve it for, i don't know, voilating the constitution and spying on U.S. citizens without just cause. |
|
DHRacer
Fire Survivor
join:2000-10-10
Lake Arrowhead, CA | More goes into the name
Than the language of the actual bill.
Who spends a few hours coming up with some stupid catchy name for something that sounds good until you read it? They probably put more effort into the name than the language, too. |
|
Blackened
Your Freedom Fries Are Stale
join:2003-09-29
| Not a surprise..
Both AT&T and the President/Executive branch had all the tools necessary to fight "terrorism", before, with checks and balances, and I'd even argue those checks and balances were very light-hearted at that.
Even so, they all still managed to severely break the law, somehow are immune from prosecution, and now want the laws they broke to become legal?
"I didn't break the law, but hey, I won't sign this bill until you make what I did legal".
No thanks. I'll take checks and balances, not giving an increasingly corrupt government even more tools at it's disposal to target citizens as if they were terrorists. |
|
disc
join:2005-12-31
Raleigh, NC
| reply to CrazyFingers
Re: Punish the Snitchers
Maybe, but if you start from the premise that terrorists hate us for our freedoms - the inverse must also be true, the terrorists love us for our laws. Obviously our founding fathers couldn't anticipate this, but fortunately our fearless leaders have recognized that by dispensing with some laws, they're removing the succor and solace they provide to the terrorists. I can only imagine how much this has put the terrorists into a shambles. Even more so since by dispensing with some laws, the Bush administration is in essence increasing freedoms, thereby taunting the terrorists with the very thing they hate. The nation terrorized becomes the provocatuer - take that you terrorists! |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Cogdis
said by Cogdis :If the constitution is amended, that amendment becomes LAW. Nobody can choose which laws they want to follow. Not even the president. Unless he chooses that option in the signing statement. |
|
