Page 1 of 5
1
2
3
... LastLast
  1. #1

    Senate bill to enhance US Citizen privacy rights rewritten to do the exact opposite.

    Here's a load of bullshit

    A US Senate bill was supposed to require LEAs to obtain a warrant before searching your private communication.

    Now the bill does a complete 180 and removes those requirements.

    This should probably be protested to your senators.

  2. #2
    I don't know if this is good or a bad thing.

    Some companies/organizations shouldn't be allowed without a search warrant.

    Also, this part just baffled me.

    to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge
    I still don't know if this is good or not, but doing this without saying anything to the owner is just bad.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Majad View Post
    I don't know if this is good or a bad thing.

    Some companies/organizations shouldn't be allowed without a search warrant.

    Also, this part just baffled me.



    I still don't know if this is good or not, but doing this without saying anything to the owner is just bad.
    The idea that a law enforcement agency would be allowed to access your private communications and accounts without a warrant is in direct violation of the 4th Amendment in this day and age.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    The idea that a law enforcement agency would be allowed to access your private communications and accounts without a warrant is in direct violation of the 4th Amendment in this day and age.
    I know 0 about the Amendment, but this could be good for a company like FBI, since getting information on people might hinder their actions to capture and/or do something about bad things, but I don't know, it's just what I think, but yes, for a lot of companies this shouldn't be allowed.

  5. #5
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    A US Senate bill was supposed to require LEAs to obtain a warrant before searching your private communication.
    I can't bring myself to get worked up over this. I just really couldn't give two shits who reads my emails.

    I also don't consider email to be a form of private communication. If I had to tell someone something very sensitive, I certainly wouldn't email them. It sucks that its like that, but I guess thats the age we live in.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    I can't bring myself to get worked up over this. I just really couldn't give two shits who reads my emails.

    I also don't consider email to be a form of private communication. If I had to tell someone something very sensitive, I certainly wouldn't email them. It sucks that its like that, but I guess thats the age we live in.
    An email is no different than a phone call in terms of privacy. Yet there are laws regarding wiretapping for law enforcement.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-20 at 11:58 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Majad View Post
    I know 0 about the Amendment, but this could be good for a company like FBI, since getting information on people might hinder their actions to capture and/or do something about bad things, but I don't know, it's just what I think, but yes, for a lot of companies this shouldn't be allowed.
    Well our 4th Amendment is supposed to prevent law enforcement agencies (such as the FBI) from snooping around in private spheres such as your home, phone, bank accounts, email or other such activities without a warrant obtained by a judge.

    The reason is because if a police officer wants to find you having done some sort of crime, he'll almost certainly find it unless prevented by such laws.
    Last edited by Laize; 2012-11-20 at 11:59 PM.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    The reason is because if a police officer wants to find you having done some sort of crime, he'll almost certainly find it unless prevented by such laws.
    I'm not sure you will win many over by this argument. "If you allow this you make it easier for law enforcement to catch criminals". Probably a good thing.

  8. #8
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,056
    I don't see how this can fly given the 4th amendment. It's like we're entitled to have no privacy anymore...

    inb4 "if you have nothing to hide then you should be ok with this"

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    The reason is because if a police officer wants to find you having done some sort of crime, he'll almost certainly find it unless prevented by such laws.
    But why would this be bad? Unless the cop is, somehow, corrupted and mentally unstable and wants to ruin your life?

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by blib View Post
    I'm not sure you will win many over by this argument. "If you allow this you make it easier for law enforcement to catch criminals". Probably a good thing.
    It might be easier explained by a video explaining why you never submit to searches without a warrant.



    It's not that it should be harder to catch criminals. It's that perfectly innocent people may be breaking laws they didn't even know existed, or someone else may have broken the law and left evidence of that transgression in their car or home.

    A law enforcement agency should never be permitted to search random people for no reason for evidence of a crime. That's one of the reasons NY's stop-and-frisk policy is so controversial.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Majad View Post
    But why would this be bad? Unless the cop is, somehow, corrupted and mentally unstable and wants to ruin your life?
    Why is wiretapping someone's phone bad then?

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Majad View Post
    But why would this be bad? Unless the cop is, somehow, corrupted and mentally unstable and wants to ruin your life?
    That's the thing, it ISN'T bad for them to go through your emails if you are actually participating in criminal activities. Laize seems to think it's a-ok for criminals to get away with stuff because it's our "right" as Americans to privately commit crimes.

    The big concern is a corrupt government misusing this power to start persecuting non criminals.
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    Unfortunately for you, dictionaries are not authorities on the definitions of words.
    Ezekiel 23:20

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Majad View Post
    But why would this be bad? Unless the cop is, somehow, corrupted and mentally unstable and wants to ruin your life?
    Put it this way.

    Ever downloaded something illegally?
    Talked about how much you hated an acquaintance?
    Visited a website that's had run-ins with illegal activity? (4chan or Reddit)

    Say that acquaintance turns up dead and they search your email without probable cause and find you talked about hating that person? Suddenly there's a motive even though you may not even be aware that said person is dead.

    It should be difficult for Law Enforcement to put someone in jail. They should have to be absolutely certain the person they're investigating is the right one. Not take a shotgun approach and see who's most likely.

  14. #14
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Noobadin View Post
    I don't see how this can fly given the 4th amendment. It's like we're entitled to have no privacy anymore...

    inb4 "if you have nothing to hide then you should be ok with this"
    There is recent precedent concerning warantless email searches being ruled unconstitutional, as long as there is an expectation of privacy. I do see this too being challenged an defeated.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleros View Post
    That's the thing, it ISN'T bad for them to go through your emails if you are actually participating in criminal activities. Laize seems to think it's a-ok for criminals to get away with stuff because it's our "right" as Americans to privately commit crimes.

    The big concern is a corrupt government misusing this power to start persecuting non criminals.
    I don't think it's ok for criminals to get away with stuff because it's our right.

    My concern is prosecution of innocents.

    This approach also leads to prioritization of crimes (such as child porn and murder) over things such as the war on drugs.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Put it this way.

    Ever downloaded something illegally?
    Talked about how much you hated an acquaintance?
    Visited a website that's had run-ins with illegal activity? (4chan or Reddit)

    Say that acquaintance turns up dead and they search your email without probable cause and find you talked about hating that person? Suddenly there's a motive even though you may not even be aware that said person is dead.

    It should be difficult for Law Enforcement to put someone in jail. They should have to be absolutely certain the person they're investigating is the right one. Not take a shotgun approach and see who's most likely.
    During the McCarthy era you could be jailed if there was even a sliver of a chance that you were a Communist. Now that our emails and all our online accounts can be accessed with ease by the authorities, you don't know what they can do with it.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Put it this way.

    Ever downloaded something illegally?
    Talked about how much you hated an acquaintance?
    Visited a website that's had run-ins with illegal activity? (4chan or Reddit)

    Say that acquaintance turns up dead and they search your email without probable cause and find you talked about hating that person? Suddenly there's a motive even though you may not even be aware that said person is dead.

    It should be difficult for Law Enforcement to put someone in jail. They should have to be absolutely certain the person they're investigating is the right one. Not take a shotgun approach and see who's most likely.
    You honestly think this is how its going to be? A homicide detective would just arrest you show the email as the only evidence and thats it you go to jail?.....Good golly.... only on the internet I swear.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-21 at 12:19 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Holyhands View Post
    During the McCarthy era you could be jailed if there was even a sliver of a chance that you were a Communist. Now that our emails and all our online accounts can be accessed with ease by the authorities, you don't know what they can do with it.
    Oh I'm sorry did we time travel? Its not that simple anymore folks...while yes you can have nightmares of being snatched up in the middle of the night and be accused of crazy crimes they are in fact still just nightmares.
    "I just wanted them to hand us our award! But they were just talk!, talk!, talk!......" - Wrathion

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Holyhands View Post
    Why is wiretapping someone's phone bad then?
    Ahm, wire tapping and searching people's emails or info on their accounts seems to be two different things to me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleros View Post
    That's the thing, it ISN'T bad for them to go through your emails if you are actually participating in criminal activities. Laize seems to think it's a-ok for criminals to get away with stuff because it's our "right" as Americans to privately commit crimes.
    No? That's pretty horrible if you think Laize thinks like that, he just doesn't like the who idea.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleros View Post
    The big concern is a corrupt government misusing this power to start persecuting non criminals.
    But the USA isn't corrupt, not joking.
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Put it this way.

    Ever downloaded something illegally?
    Talked about how much you hated an acquaintance?
    Visited a website that's had run-ins with illegal activity? (4chan or Reddit)

    Say that acquaintance turns up dead and they search your email without probable cause and find you talked about hating that person? Suddenly there's a motive even though you may not even be aware that said person is dead.
    Hm, I understand what you mean, but I really don't see a problem with it, I mean, it's called getting evidence, right? Subjects(Not the right word, I believe)?

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Holyhands View Post
    During the McCarthy era you could be jailed if there was even a sliver of a chance that you were a Communist. Now that our emails and all our online accounts can be accessed with ease by the authorities, you don't know what they can do with it.
    I'm not sure you could actually be jailed...

    I know you could be censured, blackballed or otherwise investigated... but I've never read anything about anyone being jailed.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    It might be easier explained by a video explaining why you never submit to searches without a warrant.



    It's not that it should be harder to catch criminals. It's that perfectly innocent people may be breaking laws they didn't even know existed, or someone else may have broken the law and left evidence of that transgression in their car or home.

    A law enforcement agency should never be permitted to search random people for no reason for evidence of a crime. That's one of the reasons NY's stop-and-frisk policy is so controversial.
    You are kind of missing the point. If you want to argue against this law you should do it on another basis then "they might catch people who have committed a crime". The police are quite stretched, the bigger organizations even more so, I doubt they have the time or resources to follow up on people committing so minute crimes that most people don't realize they are in fact crimes. Also I wouldn't try and compare reading emails with stopping you at random in the street.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •