"No email privacy rights under Constitution, US gov claims"
Now the Bush administration is saying they don't need a subpeona, court order or any other oversight to look at essentially any electronic communications. They can look at your email, which websites you visit, which guns you purchase over the Internet, what you say about where you hunt or how you hunt, etc...
My biggest question is this: Why does the Bushadministration have such a low tolerance for due process than anyadministration that came before it? We're not saying taht they cannot access this stuff, just that they should have some oversight and accountability in the court system, which is what the Fourth Amendment guarantees. But they don't want any of THAT!
__________________
It is wise to remember that you are one of those who can be fooled some of the time.
Laurence J. Peter (author of the "Peter Priciple")
RE: "No email privacy rights under Constitution, US gov claims"
I don't see how it's any different than snail mail with regard to protection from search. What I want to know is why this administration, which will soon be over, is so intent on eroding our rights.
__________________
Kevin Haendiges
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member
Wildlife Forever Member
GOA Member
Buckmasters Member
http://hunting-indiana.com
RE: "No email privacy rights under Constitution, US gov claims"
People get kind of wacky during war time. During the Civil War, Lincoln had some people held without charges or trial. During WWI it was illegal to speak German in the U.S. in some circumstances. Then we have that little ***anese internment thing during WWII.
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
RE: "No email privacy rights under Constitution, US gov claims"
Quote:
I don't see how it's any different than snail mail with regard to protection from search.
One difference is that the U.S. Postal service used to be a part of the Federal Government and now it is a government corporation. But my understanding is that the government had to have reasonable cause to open a letter or package. Either a suspicious smell, etc.or a warrant.
ISPs and the companies that host email servers are private companies. I think email is closer to phone conversations via the telephone companies, which has ample precedent as being protected from arbirtrary search and/or seizure, including Supreme Court rulings.
Quote:
People get kind of wacky during war time. During the Civil War, Lincoln had some people held without charges or trial. During WWI it was illegal to speak German in the U.S. in some circumstances. Then we have that little ***anese internment thing during WWII.
Those are all good points, LCC. But I believe that all of those were later ruled illegal and unconsitutional (maybe not Lincoln's actions, because it was during an insurrection?). Also, as bad as each of those were, they affected pretty small percentages of the population. This invasion of privacy would affect everyone who uses email, probably 80%+ of the U.S. population.
__________________
It is wise to remember that you are one of those who can be fooled some of the time.
Laurence J. Peter (author of the "Peter Priciple")
RE: "No email privacy rights under Constitution, US gov claims"
Well, having someone peer into my juvenile rantings on this siteor intercepting racy emails from my girlfriend is pretty light stuff compared to being shipped off to an isolated concentration camp for several years without due proces. I'm not defending any of it, just pointing out thatthings tend to get wacky during all wars.
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
RE: "No email privacy rights under Constitution, US gov claims"
"just pointing out thatthings tend to get wacky during all wars."
Yes,indeed theydo. Just that things have gotten much wackier this go around. Example: For two hundred years enemy combatants were called prisoners of war. Now they are called detainees. Now that POWshave become"detainees" there are all kinds of legal problems, political problemsand media heartburn.
In previous wars there was never an intense desire by those administrations to pry into the affairs of everyday American citizens.
RE: "No email privacy rights under Constitution, US gov claims"
I would assume that if a Democrat wins, they will be too occupied with trying to erode gun rights to worry about monitoringemails.But then again, if another version of 9/11 happens under Hilary's watch, i think that she is gonna be much less outspoken about such monitoring strategies.
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
RE: "No email privacy rights under Constitution, US gov claims"
"But then again, if another version of 9/11 happens under Hilary's watch, i think that she is gonna be much less outspoken about such monitoring strategies."
You can bet on it. You can also bet that shewould be "concerned"that all those guns in the hands of law abiding Americans could "fall into the hands of terrorists."
"No email privacy rights under Constitution, US gov claims"
