dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
22
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas to jc10098

Premium Member

to jc10098

Re: "You Have Absolutely No Privacy" - DUH!

said by jc10098:

Obama gave the NSA wiretapping program a blanket immunity.

No, the bill passed by Congress, signed by 2 presidents, and upheld by the courts, gave immunity for civil lawsuits to corporations who legally cooperated with the other provisions of the bill. There is no immunity to unlawful acts by corporations or the government.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

KrK

Premium Member

Again with the splitting of hairs. The Telcos were given blanket immunity from CIVIL LAWSUITS regarding the formerly ILLEGAL actions of the Corporations and Government.

In effect complete immunity as a citizen cannot bring criminal charges vs anyone--- only a civil case.

End result: Everyone got away with it.
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas

Premium Member

said by KrK:

Again with the splitting of hairs. The Telcos were given blanket immunity from CIVIL LAWSUITS regarding the formerly ILLEGAL actions of the Corporations and Government.

In effect complete immunity as a citizen cannot bring criminal charges vs anyone--- only a civil case.

End result: Everyone got away with it.

Almost correct. The actions were not "formerly illegal". They were legal, by definition. The 3 branches of government decide what is legal. Bill passed by congress, signed by 2 presidents, upheld by courts.

As a citizen you cannot bring criminal charges, correct. No matter how strongly you believe something is illegal, it's not your call. Except indirectly, by voting for your representatives. That's fundamental to our justice system. It's not "splitting hairs". How would you like it if some random guy could haul you into criminal court for whatever?

Unfortunately IMO there are many who hold that the "death by 1000 lawsuits" tactic is righteous when they believe their cause is just. I find it a shockingly inefficient way for a minority to try to impose its will.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

KrK

Premium Member

said by MyDogHsFleas:

Almost correct. The actions were not "formerly illegal". They were legal, by definition. The 3 branches of government decide what is legal. Bill passed by congress, signed by 2 presidents, upheld by courts.

*Retroactively after the deeds were done*

Formerly illegal. Now, legal...