• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Government computers used to find information on Joe the Plumber

Slippery Slope said:
So you wouldn't mind if your local police department showed up at your door to arrest you for the illegal drug use you've admitted to here?

How about if your insurance company decided to drop you because the government gave them all this information? Is this OK with you? I mean they are protecting other citizens by removing you, an admitted drug user and obviously a danger to someone when you're high. So jail time for you, no car insurance, no health insurance, and no employment. Sound about right in your world?
Click to expand...

Drug use isn't illegal. Possession is. ;)
 
Kayleigh Katz said:
Yes, because you probably won't be able to conduct a very successful investigation or surveillance if you have to notify the target.

So then they have to be investigating you for some reason? OK. Now who should decide if they have a valid reason for the investigation?


I can't think of anything that is normally collected that they shouldn't have access to. Is this what your asking?

Yes, that's what I'm asking and your reply was basically, there isn't anything they shouldn't have access to. Do humans make mistakes in judgments or errors in conclusions?

If its part of an investigation, yes. I don't think they should just be browsing like it was Google.

Why not? No privacy means no privacy.

What people say on a forum isn't conclusive evidence. :)

Though it might be enough to warrant further investigation.

As for me, as far as I know people aren't arrested for use, it's things like possession or intent that get you in trouble.

Could it be used as a part of other evidence? Ever hear of preponderance of evidence? Also it could be used to as an excuse to search your person, home or vehicle, since you have no right to privacy a cop could just show up and say - you said you use illegal drugs so we are going to see if you have any in your home -

I don't have health insurance, I go to a good doctor and pay as I need services. ;)

That may change some day, if your smart. Unless you are wealthy enough to pay for a broken leg... my friend just got her bill for hers; it's over $100,000... good thing she had good insurance, she only owes about $2500

I've made choices based on what I can handle and what works for me. I don't drive, but as an example: If you don't have the money to pay for the repairs and upkeep on a Mercedes you should buy a Chevy instead. Is it unfair that some people enjoy a higher standard of living than others? Maybe, but it doesn't change reality. I do what I can afford and that's the approach I recommend to others.

You're missing the point. If your information isn't private then all sorts of things can be used against you by various people/organizations.

In the case of your gay Republican politician, if you can't afford the consequences of the behavior I guess you better not engage in that behavior. Or, on the other hand, you could use whatever power you've accumulated and work for change.

In a perfect world, people wouldn't make bad decisions. In a perfect world there wouldn't be bigotry.
We don't live in a perfect world.
Click to expand...
 
Slippery Slope said:
So then they have to be investigating you for some reason? OK. Now who should decide if they have a valid reason for the investigation?
Click to expand...
How is it done now? Intelligence organizations watch known threats and try to identify new ones. If you look like a potential threat then I guess you'd be on their radar.

Slippery Slope said:
Yes, that's what I'm asking and your reply was basically, there isn't anything they shouldn't have access to. Do humans make mistakes in judgments or errors in conclusions?
Click to expand...
Sure they do, but I'm ok with that.


Slippery Slope said:
Why not? No privacy means no privacy.
Click to expand...
Ok then let 'er rip! :D


Slippery Slope said:
Could it be used as a part of other evidence? Ever hear of preponderance of evidence? Also it could be used to as an excuse to search your person, home or vehicle, since you have no right to privacy a cop could just show up and say - you said you use illegal drugs so we are going to see if you have any in your home -
Click to expand...
Sure. If the authorities believe they have enough evidence to warrant a search then they should do it. Someone posting that they intended to bomb the White house should be investigated further. If the threat looks credible then sure they should have there home searched.

Slippery Slope said:
That may change some day, if your smart. Unless you are wealthy enough to pay for a broken leg... my friend just got her bill for hers; it's over $100,000... good thing she had good insurance, she only owes about $2500
Click to expand...
It guess it could change... maybe if the stock market totally crashes, but I doubt it. I don't think I'd have any trouble covering a broken bone. :D


Slippery Slope said:
You're missing the point. If your information isn't private then all sorts of things can be used against you by various people/organizations.
Click to expand...
I think I understand that point. My take on it is that you shouldn't do anything you're not prepared to take the consequences for. If what you want to do has negative consequences then either don't do it or take the risk. If you want to be really bold you can work to change what you don't like.


Slippery Slope said:
In a perfect world, people wouldn't make bad decisions. In a perfect world there wouldn't be bigotry. We don't live in a perfect world.
Click to expand...
I know. That's why we need people who have the job of watching out for us so we don't die in terrorist attacks and such.

Here's another example of how I feel about this... If I had to go through airport security and they used that machine that lets them see through my clothes I wouldn't feel violated. If my luggage was searched and they put all my underwear on display for everyone to see I wouldn't care. If I was taken aside and basically felt up by a male guard I wouldn't protest. I would be glad to know my plane was safe. Could these things be abused? Certainly, but I'd rather be safe.

I know we aren't going to really agree on this but I do appreciate the civil discourse. :D
 
Kayleigh Katz said:
How is it done now? Intelligence organizations watch known threats and try to identify new ones. If you look like a potential threat then I guess you'd be on their radar.


Sure they do, but I'm ok with that.



Ok then let 'er rip! :D



Sure. If the authorities believe they have enough evidence to warrant a search then they should do it. Someone posting that they intended to bomb the White house should be investigated further. If the threat looks credible then sure they should have there home searched.


It guess it could change... maybe if the stock market totally crashes, but I doubt it. I don't think I'd have any trouble covering a broken bone. :D



I think I understand that point. My take on it is that you shouldn't do anything you're not prepared to take the consequences for. If what you want to do has negative consequences then either don't do it or take the risk. If you want to be really bold you can work to change what you don't like.



I know. That's why we need people who have the job of watching out for us so we don't die in terrorist attacks and such.

Here's another example of how I feel about this... If I had to go through airport security and they used that machine that lets them see through my clothes I wouldn't feel violated. If my luggage was searched and they put all my underwear on display for everyone to see I wouldn't care. If I was taken aside and basically felt up by a male guard I wouldn't protest. I would be glad to know my plane was safe. Could these things be abused? Certainly, but I'd rather be safe.

I know we aren't going to really agree on this but I do appreciate the civil discourse. :D
Click to expand...

We aren't going to agree because you don't see the inherent danger in a lack of privacy.
 
Kayleigh Katz said:
I know. That's why we need people who have the job of watching out for us so we don't die in terrorist attacks and such.
Click to expand...

Not at the cost or our rights and liberties.

I think this quote fits you well, at least from the sound of your post.

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
Not at the cost or our rights and liberties.

I think this quote fits you well, at least from the sound of your post.

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Click to expand...

Ikari, I know we disagree. You think you have freedom that I would take from you. I don't believe you ever had the freedom to lose. We're sort of at an impasse. ;)
 
Slippery Slope said:
We aren't going to agree because you don't see the inherent danger in a lack of privacy.
Click to expand...

Then let's talk about that. What is the inherent danger?

I think the inherent danger is some people might have their lives "ruined". I think the potential pay off is that we avert an attack and save hundreds or thousands of lives.
 
Kayleigh Katz said:
Ikari, I know we disagree. You think you have freedom that I would take from you. I don't believe you ever had the freedom to lose. We're sort of at an impasse. ;)
Click to expand...

You may not think that, but the 4th amendment says differently.

You can sit around and allow government to do whatever you like to yourself. If you want to be a slave, if you don't have the resolve to accept freedom and liberty, I'm not going to stop you from chaining yourself. When you try to chain me, that's when we have the problem. I'm not going to have the weak take my freedom because they can't handle the heat. Do whatever you want to yourself, when you involve the rights of others however, the situation changes.
 
Kayleigh Katz said:
Then let's talk about that. What is the inherent danger?

I think the inherent danger is some people might have their lives "ruined". I think the potential pay off is that we avert an attack and save hundreds or thousands of lives.
Click to expand...

It's not just that some lives can be ruined, it's that government gains far too much control over our lives when we give up personal freedoms.

Do you understand the idea behind quotes like this:

Give me liberty or give me death.

There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.

Your success as a family, our success as a society, depends not on what happens at the White House, but what happens inside your house.

If you say to people that they, as a matter of fact, can’t protect their conversations, in particular their political conversations, I think you take a long step toward making a transition from a free society to a totalitarian society.

Big Brother in the form of an increasingly powerful government and in an increasingly powerful private sector will pile the records high with reasons why privacy should give way to national security, to law and order, to efficiency of operation, to scientific advancement and the like.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences.
 
Ikari said:
You may not think that, but the 4th amendment says differently.
Click to expand...

:D

Ok.

Take your 4th amendment...

Hell, take all of them and go to Gitmo and convince them of the glory of the US and how we respect freedom.

When you get back, defeated, we'll talk about freedom and reality in the USA.

:D
 
Slippery Slope said:
It's not just that some lives can be ruined, it's that government gains far too much control over our lives when we give up personal freedoms.

Do you understand the idea behind quotes like this:

Give me liberty or give me death.
Click to expand...

etc. etc...

Yes, I do understand the idea behind them.

Do you understand the reality under which you live? They already do already violate your rights every way you can imagine and probably a few you're not familiar with. :roll:
 
Kayleigh Katz said:
:D

Ok.

Take your 4th amendment...

Hell, take all of them and go to Gitmo and convince them of the glory of the US and how we respect freedom.

When you get back, defeated, we'll talk about freedom and reality in the USA.

:D
Click to expand...

Wow. Well then, the Republic is lost. It's sad to see the weak will of the scared masses, but I suppose you live beyond the means a person should in the lap of luxury, that one forgets the lessons fought for and won in the past. Well this may be your idea of the perfect future for America, living under the iron fist of government having them do everything for us so we no longer have to think or feel. But you're gonna have to kill a bunch of us to get there, and we ain't gonna make it easy.
 
Kayleigh Katz said:
etc. etc...

Yes, I do understand the idea behind them.

Do you understand the reality under which you live? They already do already violate your rights every way you can imagine and probably a few you're not familiar with. :roll:
Click to expand...

Yes yes, government transgression against our rights is reality so we should all bend over, lube up if there is time, and take it in the ass. Nice. Real nice.

The government does overstep it's boundaries oft, that's not excuse to forgive it, accept it, or proliferate it as you would like. While there certainly is the apathetic and weak crowd who can't think or do anything for themselves; there is another group which act oppositely. But I'll tell you one thing, your response truly demonstrates that you do not understand the idea behind the warnings and wisdom of our founders.
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
Wow. Well then, the Republic is lost. It's sad to see the weak will of the scared masses, but I suppose you live beyond the means a person should in the lap of luxury, that one forgets the lessons fought for and won in the past. Well this may be your idea of the perfect future for America, living under the iron fist of government having them do everything for us so we no longer have to think or feel. But you're gonna have to kill a bunch of us to get there, and we ain't gonna make it easy.
Click to expand...

Hey, one per customer, stop stealing SS's thunder.

The Republic isn't lost, you never had it to lose. I think the part of my assertion your missing is that the freedom you keep talking about defending has never really been yours.

You also seem to think I'm some how in favor of it. Too much knee-jerk, not enough paying attention. You're all "kill the messenger!" just because you don't like what you assume I'm saying.
 
Kayleigh Katz said:
Hey, one per customer, stop stealing SS's thunder.

The Republic isn't lost, you never had it to lose. I think the part of my assertion your missing is that the freedom you keep talking about defending has never really been yours.

You also seem to think I'm some how in favor of it. Too much knee-jerk, not enough paying attention. You're all "kill the messenger!" just because you don't like what you assume I'm saying.
Click to expand...

It's not just the messenger whom will get it. You really just don't understand the foundations of rights and liberty. It's well evident from your posts. Not much left to say but enjoy your servitude. May history never remember that you were our countryman.
 
Ikari said:
It's not just the messenger whom will get it. You really just don't understand the foundations of rights and liberty.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure I do. I just know they weren't built into this or any other country yet.

Ikari said:
It's well evident from your posts. Not much left to say but enjoy your servitude. May history never remember that you were our countryman.
Click to expand...

LOL, you must be forgetting that I'm from the ruling class. There is most definitely servitude going on, but I will be on the other end of the equation. :D
 
Kayleigh Katz said:
I'm pretty sure I do. I just know they weren't built into this or any other country yet.



LOL, you must be forgetting that I'm from the ruling class. There is most definitely servitude going on, but I will be on the other end of the equation. :D
Click to expand...

Ok yeah, so you don't understand.
 
Hey Joe,

Unfortunately Obama's socialism won't spread plumbing licenses to apprentices like you, so you better work your three to five years as an apprentice -do not forget to pull a plumber apprentice license- and have the correspondent code test later.

I can't tell you more and neither I won't discuss about your future any further because the this essential step has to be a reality first: your journeyman plumber license.

So, you are "past history" until then.

Good luck.
 
conquer said:
Hey Joe,

Unfortunately Obama's socialism won't spread plumbing licenses to apprentices like you, so you better work your three to five years as an apprentice -do not forget to pull a plumber apprentice license- and have the correspondent code test later.

I can't tell you more and neither I won't discuss about your future any further because the this essential step has to be a reality first: your journeyman plumber license.

So, you are "past history" until then.

Good luck.
Click to expand...

I saw "Joe" on CNN yesterday. He doesn't realize that we have a Progressive tax system RIGHT NOW! As bugs would say "What a maroon".

Too bad the commentator didn't think quick enough to catch it and explain our progressive tax system to him. There's video at the link.

Joe The Plumber Vs. CNN's Rick Sanchez: "You're Asking Me Insane Questions"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom