• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants

LaMidRighter said:
I joined the Libertarian party the week of the election, I'm not in the "y'all" catagory because of what you are speaking of. LOL!
And I agree, people need to wake up before we have to sign a waiver to leave our houses.
Click to expand...

Dude, mea culpa. I didn't mean for that post to go to you but rather the thread in general.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Dude, mea culpa. I didn't mean for that post to go to you but rather the thread in general.
Click to expand...
It's all good, I took it the way you meant it but was basically backing you on what you were saying. I more than gave the GOP time to find it's way back to the Goldwater/Reagan model but it kept going further left........so I went Libertarian, much closer to our constitution.
 
MarineTpartier said:
Does anyone else find it ironic that the hippy generation that protested against war, the man, gov't oversight, etc is now getting involved in not only this crap, but legislating what we can eat, drink, etc?
Click to expand...

That is because many of the hippie generation are still mentally/psychologically children, and children want a controlling authority, because they are not secure without it. That was the first thing I learned in Parenting 101. ;)
 
American said:
Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants | Politics and Law - CNET News

Daily Kos: No warrant required for private communications?


Pat Leahy's committee has a bill up for vote soon that apparently was QUIETLY rewritten for govt snoopers to dig through your emails without ANYONE'S knowledge. How do you like your transparent government? I added the Daily Kos link so lefties wouldn't accuse me of a biased article. Apparently Leahy has a history mixed stands on privacy. I suspect that Leahy is a closet peeping-tom. Leahy is a huge asshole btw, which doesn't help either. It'll be interesting to learn how intrusive this law will be. Hopefully it'll get watered down to worthlessness.
Click to expand...
This...is horrible. The government is getting way too comfortable with overstepping its power, particularly when it comes to internet communications. I'm getting more and more pissed off by this BS.
 
Aderleth said:
Methinks they're going to have a hard time getting this past SCOTUS. Warrantless access to Facebook wall posts is one thing (since they're already the internet equivalent of shouting in a room full of people), but email is private, and we've got fourth amendment protections for such things.
Click to expand...
Yeah. If this is true, the minute it becomes law is the minute its journey to SCOTUS will begin.
 
Fine, go through all the Viagra ads.
 
LaMidRighter said:
One would think, unfortunately politicians have been overstepping federal court decisions for a while now to the point that they've almost become irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Well... yes, but that doesn't really directly impact the point that I'm making, which is that a federal court can effectively shut down a federal law pending SCOTUS analysis. Congress can do whatever crazy **** it wants. But if what they're doing has constitutional implications, the law they've created very likely won't be enforced for very long.
 
Aderleth said:
Methinks they're going to have a hard time getting this past SCOTUS. Warrantless access to Facebook wall posts is one thing (since they're already the internet equivalent of shouting in a room full of people), but email is private, and we've got fourth amendment protections for such things.
Click to expand...

You have that ass backwards. The EPA is government - the EPA doesn't have a right to privacy.....

Those e-mails are subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

Now when it comes to Facebook, the government has no right to view a private page (a page set to private) - the government(s) would need a search warrant to do such.
 
Mr.Nick said:
You have that ass backwards. The EPA is government - the EPA doesn't have a right to privacy.....
Click to expand...

EPA meaning the Environmental Protection Agency? Yeah, they're bound by the same fourth amendment issues as every other federal agency. So whether or not they have a right to privacy is largely irrelevant to this conversation. Whether or not they have a right to access otherwise private information is directly relevant to this conversation, and the answer is that they do not have any such right absent a warrant.

Mr.Nick said:
Those e-mails are subject to the Freedom of Information Act.
Click to expand...

Probably not. FOIA impacts governmental communications. It has no impact whatsoever on private emails.
 
Aderleth said:
Well... yes, but that doesn't really directly impact the point that I'm making, which is that a federal court can effectively shut down a federal law pending SCOTUS analysis. Congress can do whatever crazy **** it wants. But if what they're doing has constitutional implications, the law they've created very likely won't be enforced for very long.
Click to expand...
I don't know, I've seen them simply change a word or two and reissue the same exact policy before. I guess what I'm getting at is that if they want to flip off the court they'll figure out a way to do it.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I don't know, I've seen them simply change a word or two and reissue the same exact policy before. I guess what I'm getting at is that if they want to flip off the court they'll figure out a way to do it.
Click to expand...

I really do understand that perspective, but if you actually know the law, it's generally less accurate than what you're suggesting. There absolutely are exceptions, but in general, congress really can't get away with insanity for very long unless it's got SCOTUS backing (somehow).
 
Aderleth said:
I really do understand that perspective, but if you actually know the law, it's generally less accurate than what you're suggesting. There absolutely are exceptions, but in general, congress really can't get away with insanity for very long unless it's got SCOTUS backing (somehow).
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing that it should be harder to get around, I agree with that. I've seen this the last ten years or so and the fact that they've gotten away with ignoring courts concerns me.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I'm not arguing that it should be harder to get around, I agree with that. I've seen this the last ten years or so and the fact that they've gotten away with ignoring courts concerns me.
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure that's true. Are you talking about something specific?
 
Aderleth said:
EPA meaning the Environmental Protection Agency? Yeah, they're bound by the same fourth amendment issues as every other federal agency. So whether or not they have a right to privacy is largely irrelevant to this conversation. Whether or not they have a right to access otherwise private information is directly relevant to this conversation, and the answer is that they do not have any such right absent a warrant.
Click to expand...

Work e-mails are not private e-mails and we employ the EPA, hence those e-mails are public record. Well unless they're classified, but why would the EPA have classified documents?

You may as well imply a business needs or has no business to read and would need a warrant to look at e-mails sent on the servers that they own.

Probably not. FOIA impacts governmental communications. It has no impact whatsoever on private emails.
Click to expand...

Oh those e-mails most certainly are subject to FOIA....
 
Aderleth said:
I'm really not sure that's true. Are you talking about something specific?
Click to expand...
The latest two that immediately come to mind are the handgun ban in Chicago and the oil moratorium. In both cases the "reissued" laws were a word or two changed, but the results were the same.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Work e-mails are not private e-mails and we employ the EPA, hence those e-mails are public record. Well unless they're classified, but why would the EPA have classified documents?

You may as well imply a business needs or has no business to read and would need a warrant to look at e-mails sent on the servers that they own.
Click to expand...

Work emails certainly aren't private emails, but depending on what you're talking about, they're afforded basically the same fourth amendment protections.


Mr.Nick said:
Oh those e-mails most certainly are subject to FOIA....
Click to expand...

When you say "those" emails, what are you talking about?
 
Aderleth said:
Work emails certainly aren't private emails, but depending on what you're talking about, they're afforded basically the same fourth amendment protections.
Click to expand...

In what universe are employers not allowed to monitor THEIR e-mails on THEIR servers on THEIR networks?

Who employs the government? oh yeah - the US taxpayer!



When you say "those" emails, what are you talking about?
Click to expand...

Would you rather had me use a noun?

The EPA e-mails are subject to the FOIA.
 
Mr.Nick said:
In what universe are employers not allowed to monitor THEIR e-mails on THEIR servers on THEIR networks?

Who employs the government? oh yeah - the US taxpayer!





Would you rather had me use a noun?

The EPA e-mails are subject to the FOIA.
Click to expand...

I suspect that you and I are not having the same conversation. Obviously, yes, EPA emails are subject to FOIA requests. Emails by private entities really aren't, in general. So I honestly have no idea what the hell point you're trying to make at the moment.
 
Well, this bill certainly stinks. I just read through it. Currently, the law states they have to provide you notice within 3 days of obtaining a search warrant. The proposed changes state they can request a delay for up to a maximum of 90 days if (this is taken from the bill):
‘‘(2) DETERMINATION.—A court shall grant a
request for delayed notification made under para-
graph (1) if the court determines that there is rea-
son to believe that notification of the existence of the
warrant may result in—
‘‘(A) endangering the life or physical safety
of an individual;
‘‘(B) flight from prosecution;
‘‘(C) destruction of or tampering with evi-
dence;
‘‘(D) intimidation of potential witnesses;
‘‘(E) otherwise seriously jeopardizing an
investigation or unduly delaying a trial; or
‘‘(F) endangering national security.
Click to expand...

The Bill also states they can grant 1 or more extensions for a period of up to 90 days each.

Specifically this affects:
SECTION 2703.—Section 2703(c) of title 18, United States Code, as redesignated by subsection (a), is amended—

...by striking "the contents of a wire or electronic communication, or the records or other information sought," and inserting "the records, other information, or historical geolocation information sought"
Click to expand...

So the Bill specifically removes e-mail communication (presumably it will be considered a record) and adds geolocation. If you are using sites like FourSquare, you better delete all your info and your account. They are going to find out where you've been hanging out.

Yeah, this is pissing me off as bad as when I read through the Patriot Act. All law enforcement needs is an assumption that you are a threat to national security and they will track you, dig a hole for you, bury you, then leave the warrant on top of the dirt pile.

Just for the record, I didn't have Patrick Leahy on my voting ballot, so I didn't vote for him.
 
I also forgot, turn off the GPS on your cell phone if you haven't done so already. And stop using a navigation system in your car. All those are subject to tracking if this bill passes, including the historical data in those devices.
 
Aderleth said:
I suspect that you and I are not having the same conversation. Obviously, yes, EPA emails are subject to FOIA requests. Emails by private entities really aren't, in general. So I honestly have no idea what the hell point you're trying to make at the moment.
Click to expand...

Oh businesses do, and have every right to monitor corporate/business e-mails when they're sent via their e-mail server.

Obviously a business has absolutely no right looking into an individuals personal account (hotmail/live etc). However when it's sent from their business e-mail no warrant is needed.

The same standard applies to the EPA. The Fourth Amendment doesn't apply to government documents, this is actually a First Amendment issue not a Fourth Amendment issue. We have the right to petition government hence my aforementioned assertions with the FOIA.
 
Green Balls said:
I also forgot, turn off the GPS on your cell phone if you haven't done so already. And stop using a navigation system in your car. All those are subject to tracking if this bill passes, including the historical data in those devices.
Click to expand...

The Patriot Act already allows GPS tracking..... In theory the Patriot Act would allow government to microchip individuals...
 
Green Balls said:
View attachment 67138351
Click to expand...

I don't really believe it was Bush's intent to create an authoritarian government. However I think there are plenty of bureaucrats who are authoritarian, who believe they know better or whats best for common man, and they will use the Patriot Act (among other nonsense such as Obamacare) as an excuse to play 1984 with the US public.

In short the Patriot act was a can of worms or a slippery slope.

Sometimes good intentions have harmful consequences.
 
Mr.Nick said:
I don't really believe it was Bush's intent to create an authoritarian government. However I think there are plenty of bureaucrats who are authoritarian, who believe they know better or whats best for common man, and they will use the Patriot Act (among other nonsense such as Obamacare) as an excuse to play 1984 with the US public.

In short the Patriot act was a can of worms or a slippery slope.

Sometimes good intentions have harmful consequences.
Click to expand...

I'm still trying to figure out why anyone would have voted for that bill, regardless of 9/11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom