• #23
    Say two words "National Security" and bye bye 4th, the judge will concur it's a reasonable search and allow them in
  • #25
    I am all too aware of the fact that in the name of protecting the nation they have destroyed it. Like I said in the post it violates the fourth amendment, but these days many don't seem to care...
  • #27
    @Elliotsreport Yes, in some cases it's justified, in others it's not. Wonder what additional things Obama's Exec Order 20 allows them to do...
  • #34
    I voted Obama, still I feel excutive orders are widely abused and often unconstitutionally over reach. Am not familiar with that order, but if the patriot act and other post 9/11 laws were repealed mich freedom would be restored. We are headed toward fascism, and I mean the real thing, not the way people just throw the word around to condem people who political orientation they disagree with...
  • #64

    It's never justifiable to bypass the constitution and our basic rights. Attitudes like that spit on the very principles this country was founded upon. Freedom, liberty, whatever you want to call it requires risk. The risk of allowing your enemies a means to strike at you through those same freedoms you enjoy. You can't pick and choose who enjoys liberty otherwise it's not truly liberty.
  • R Load more replies

  • #12
    Saying "I don't have anything to hide" is the attitude they are hoping for. It isn't about people hiding anything, it is about privacy and the Constitution. What if you had to be strip searched whenever you left the grocery store to make sure you didn't shop lift? If you didn't shop lift, you should have no problem with it, right?
  • #18
    As well as mine. I won't say I don't "have anything to hide", but, what I am hiding will NOT land me on any "list"!(please, oh mighty government boys, don't tell my wife about my Vegas stayed there, I swear!! LOL) Merry Turkey day to all and to all a good supper!!
  • R Load more replies

  • #4
    If the laws are not strong enough to protect our privacy now, then it is time to strenghten them so that do protect the people.
  • #26
    For those of who claim they have nothing to hide:

    Are you ok with coming home to find that your place has been ransacked by law enforcement?
    Have you never used profanity in an email?
    Would you be ok with strip-searches in malls, as one poster has already asked?
    Are you ok with random cavity searches too?
    Is it ok if the government mainatains a record of every phone call and email?

    Why do you have curtains in your windows?
    Why do you wear clothes?
    Will you please post all your credit card transactions for us to see?
    Can the government put a monitor on your car to make sure you never violate a single traffic law?
    Should all your taxes be audited every time you file?

    Should we abolish laws against voyeurism?
    can your neighbor install a camera in your bedroom window so they can be a good citizen and report you if you do something they suspect is illegal?

    You are taking your privacy for granted, pure and simple.
    And everyone is guilty of something. Everyone has something to hide.
  • #24
    Or any government official. Remember which administration the PATRIOT act started under? When it comes to civil liberties, both parties should be ashamed.
  • #32
    I also remember which administration ran a campaign in 2008 to repeal it and then promptly "forgot to' once elected.
  • #35
    @bizaroWorld Like I said, both parties have horrible track records on civil liberties. There has been very little opposition in either party on this intrusion, there is a handful of GOP and I can only think of one Dem in Congress that speaks out against this.
  • #37
    That's right. They're not going to search my home or my car without a warrant,so why would I want them in my email. I have nothing to hide but I feel like alot of times they use intimidation to violate our rights and make us feel like we've done something wrong when we haven't.
  • R Load more replies

  • #60
    Big Brother thinks he has to protect us from us. The bigger a gov't grows, the more it wants to control our lives, well it makes sense cause they have to justify their size. Same with all the gov't handing out more funding for this or that social program, they figure if they are ganna fund it then they are ganna tell you how you have to live.
    Big Gov't sucks away our independence and to many programs may help some, but it weakens a nation in the end.
    A wolf in sheeps clothing.
  • #43
    What kind of idiot would want this??? Apparently your government thinks your an idiot, or why would they bring forth a bill that infringes on our rights as American citizens?!?!? Welcome to the police state ladies and gentlemen!!! This is just another extension of the "Patriot" act....

    I'm definitely sure that one of these Politix sheep will think its somehow a good idea to violate our constitutional rights!!!
  • #53
    That would be because of the hipster generation with its ideology of "It doesnt effect me, so why should I care?" They are also hard at work at neglecting the responsibility to protect ownership rights as well as meaningful representative government.

    "You wanna save this country? Kill all the teenagers!"- Bobaflex
  • #92

    Cmon now... That isnt fair at all. These are elected officials. They had to work hard pandering to their voting constituents to gain/retain their job. Do you really think it is fair to expect them to understand all the inner workings of all the interconnected tubes that make up the internet, or even have a clue what foresight is to look 3 steps down the line and figure out what the effect of their cause in passing this sort of legislation would be?

    I mean maybe had we elected Herman Cain, and he implemented his "all bills will be 3 pages" measures to cliffnote running the country, but cmon with out it, these poor diligent souls are condemned to a life of wandering aimlessly through red tape mazes and bureaucracy.

    Wheres Hermes Conrad when you need him!
  • #39
    Fourth Amendment states, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
    A warrent must be judicially sanctioned and reasonable.
  • #52
    Tyranny... "To maintain the ascendancy of the Constitution over the lawmaking majority is the great and essential point on which the success of the [American] system must depend; unless that ascendancy can be preserved, the necessary consequence must be that the laws will supersede the Constitution; and, finally, the will of the Executive, by influence of its patronage, will supersede the laws ..." -John Calhoun
  • #29
    As my mom used to say. "Never put anything in writing that you can't defend in court."
    That having been said, if asked I'd gladly allow anyone to look at may email history. They'd probably be board to death too.(Hell I get board deleting all the sale spam.) BUT no one has the right to just randomly go snooping through it. Ask or get a warrant.
  • #5
    Then let the sneaky spy people read this: Happy Thanksgiving to all. May your blessing be many and your troubles few. :-)
  • #2
    It would be impossible to stop them. I don't care what the law says when you send data over the internet the feds and anyone else who wants to bad enough can read it. When the head of the CIA can have his personal e-mails read what chance do you think anyone else has of keeping their emails private?
  • #30
    They read his emails by conducting a warrantless search... is that ok with you? Since they can already do it, we should go ahead and abolish the 4th Amendment? Do you think evidence obtained without a warrant should be used against someone in a court of law? What other rights do you propose we abolish?
  • #44
    i suspect they do read anything they want. i am against it without a warrant yet what can be done to stop it?
  • #45
    @DogLady_1 Where in any of my posts do you see that I am supporting any warrantless searches or any erosion of rights in any way? I am saying that if anyone - government or not wants the information sent through the internet bad enough they can get it. It's out there and a clever person or organization can get it. That is not a political statement it is a technical statement. You should consider anything you say online to be both public and permanent with very few exceptions.
  • #46
    @tomincali Nothing. It's too easy technically to do. If some high school kid with a 5 year old computer can hack into you accounts do you really think that there is anything you can do to stop the government - laws or no laws?
  • #48
    @PNWest have to agree with you on this. there is no way to stop it or even know it was done, unless your wife's secret sauce is in the paper the next day.
  • R Load more replies

  • #110
    This is the kind of thing that makes me wanna pay some virtual visits

    The government captures all electronic communications in the us. All of it. Period. And thet have for years

    Are people just ignoring headlines. I've said it many times here and sure, don't read me its not meant to work that way but god

    How much of it is well organized as stored, and whether gov can retrieve it is what I question. But it's all stored and we can figure it out if we want to. And now they are making laws.

    By now 20 workers have 40 copies of everything incloud storage just in case they are threatened. It's how a good hacker thinks. Don't give away what's up but if u have to come down fast and hard and control the positioning of people who want to make u scapegoat. Takes less than a week and leave people exposed, careers ruined and calling for hearings.

    About what. Never saw a thing. I have no data. Sure, take a look all u want. I would never do such a thing

    Our govt is not up to the task not even close. Paranoia colorful and useful but knowledge and a bit of smart and things like this read like a bad joke. Not that I've ever done anything, or would know anyone like that or how to do it. Not me no way I'm a nice guy have a cookie

    The govt and many other have had everything and continue to collect it. And if they go about it the right way they'll get someone to retrieve whatever they want.

    These horses left the barn a long time ago. Once u set it up right things run themselves and no ones ever heard of any of it. Not us

    My god this scares me. Cause we actually do need govt and attorneys and smart people of all kinds and opinions across the spectrum to do this right Tear down the thing that goin now if u can find it all. Someone is paying for it somewhere start there. Plus ten years ago some tourist reporter wandered in to duplicate download site and was taking pix of govt intercepting all electronic info and of course publishes on the web and no one realizes what they're looking at

    Oh god. Got that sick feeling. Going to bed. Go make some laws lol
  • #109
    any thing i post on, public websites is fair game. but personal e-mail, is another story. although i never have, anything on my computer. hot enough, to investigate. nor could i ever imagine, anyone being bored enough, to actually read my e-mails. what kind of peeping com pervert, would do that anyway.
  • #90
    The government views its citizenry as nothing more than revenue producing insects who safely exist at the pleasure of the government. After all, it has become extraordinarily simple to keep the electorate perfectly divided which, in turn, protects the morons and imbeciles we have in power. It's embarassing really.
  • #88
    you dont think they already read it if they want? look how corrupt our gubment is, they would never ever get caught reading our stuff. Even if they did who would you tell, the same gubment that is reading it?
  • #80
    Privacy is nice and the problem is data collection by the private sector. BigGuv knows very little about you compared to your details that accumulate in retail, financial, and browsing data banks.
  • #86
    The thing about the private sector is, you have to give some type of consent for anyone in the private sector to collect data or accessibility to anything! The government wants accessibility to our personal lives without any consent what so ever!!! I think I trust the private sector a little more, for the simple fact that I get to pick and choose who I want and what I want them to see and access!!! The government only wants to protect us from ourselves! And that sir/mam is OPPRESSION!!!
  • #87
    @JpMonty You don't consent to anything in the private sector, and they gather what they can, which is a helluva lot more than the government will ever know about you. Your personal information is a commodity, freely peddled to anyone willing to pay, and you don't have a clue as to who's buying it, who's selling it, what the data contains, or if it's even true. Wanna pass a privacy bill that shields us from both BigGuv and BigBiz equally, bring it on.
  • #84
    Ha, I know right.... Apparently the minority are the only ones who affect votes in Washington.
  • #73
    It is only reasonable to require a search warrant, which the authorities require probable cause to obtain. This is, in part, because doing so forces authorities to concentrate their resources and attention upon information that they have a basis in fact to maintain an interest in. Although they might well collect much more damning information in an unrestricted drag net, the resources don't exist to evaluate such an unfocused stream of information.
  • #61
    If you put it on the internet it can be read or seen by anyone who knows how to look. So, if you don't want it read, don't put it out there!
    There is, however, a difference between internet and intranet. Intranets should be secure from outside viewing unless authorized.
  • R Load more comments...