• 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!

When the government spies on it's citizens.

Should government entities have any privacy or personal info protected(read op)?

  • other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I do not know.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    10

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,867
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
When the government spies on it's citizens should government entities(law enforcement,elected and appointed officials, intelligence,military and etc) have any privacy or personal info protected?

Yes regardless of the government entity.
Yes depending the government entity.(please specify)
No
Other
I do not know.

I ask this question because in a occu-tard thread about some occu-tard protesters hacking and posting addresses of some police officers another poster brought a very valid point.The government does worse and spies on the American people,so how can they expect to have any privacy themselves or expect their personal info to be protected. I actually agree with that point.
 
Last edited:
I ask this question because in a occu-tard thread about some occu-tard protesters hacking and posting addresses of some police officers another poster brought a very valid point.The government does worse and spies on the American people,so how can they expect to have any privacy themselves or expect their personal info to be protected. I actually agree with that point.
I tend to agree with this, as well. One side isn't automatically more pure and righteous than the other. To me, it's a natural check/balance.

I picked "Yes depending the government entity.(please specify)" because I do feel there should be exemptions for legitimate national security, but then the government has been prone to exaggerating what national security really is, so I'm not real solid on this choice.
 
Last edited:
Posting cops home addresses is not cool.

Posting Poindexters(?) Personal information after he was crowing about Total Spectrum Awareness (Carnivore), was poetry.

Its all about time, place, and relevance.

"Outing" philandering "family values" types is fine for this reason. Hypocrisy should be punished, and turnabout is fair play.
 
When the government spies on it's citizens should government entities(law enforcement,elected and appointed officials, intelligence,military and etc) have any privacy or personal info protected?

Yes regardless of the government entity.
Yes depending the government entity.(please specify)
No
Other
I do not know.

I ask this question because in a occu-tard thread about some occu-tard protesters hacking and posting addresses of some police officers another poster brought a very valid point.The government does worse and spies on the American people,so how can they expect to have any privacy themselves or expect their personal info to be protected. I actually agree with that point.

Nope, I believe that governments should fear their people and act accordingly.
 
When the government spies on it's citizens should government entities(law enforcement,elected and appointed officials, intelligence,military and etc) have any privacy or personal info protected?

Yes regardless of the government entity.
Yes depending the government entity.(please specify)
No
Other
I do not know.

I ask this question because in a occu-tard thread about some occu-tard protesters hacking and posting addresses of some police officers another poster brought a very valid point.The government does worse and spies on the American people,so how can they expect to have any privacy themselves or expect their personal info to be protected. I actually agree with that point.

When one group of people is able to act against another group of people without repercussion is the ultimate definition of tyranny and oppression.

So is when one group of people has protections that another group of people cannot enjoy.
 
The CIA is the only government entity that should be allowed secrecy. They cannot do their jobs if it's common knowledge who they are and where they live.

This however should never be abused in a way that hurts the general populous. There should be heavy penalties for a breach of that trust.
 
When the government spies on it's citizens should government entities(law enforcement,elected and appointed officials, intelligence,military and etc) have any privacy or personal info protected?

Yes regardless of the government entity.
Yes depending the government entity.(please specify)
No
Other
I do not know.

I ask this question because in a occu-tard thread about some occu-tard protesters hacking and posting addresses of some police officers another poster brought a very valid point.The government does worse and spies on the American people,so how can they expect to have any privacy themselves or expect their personal info to be protected. I actually agree with that point.

The government as an entity has very little privacy. Most people working in the government have zero say in the government and any monitoring/spying on other Americans, even those who might do so as part of their job.
 
When the government spies on it's citizens should government entities(law enforcement,elected and appointed officials, intelligence,military and etc) have any privacy or personal info protected?

Yes regardless of the government entity.
Yes depending the government entity.(please specify)
No
Other
I do not know.

I ask this question because in a occu-tard thread about some occu-tard protesters hacking and posting addresses of some police officers another poster brought a very valid point.The government does worse and spies on the American people,so how can they expect to have any privacy themselves or expect their personal info to be protected. I actually agree with that point.
Government policy and personal behavior are two completely different things.

Government can print money. Individuals cannot.
Government can execute people. Individuals cannot.
Government can wage war. Individuals cannot.

To the extent the government spies on its citizens those are persons of interest under investigation. Individuals hacking government computers and publicizing the home addresses of police officers is a crime and totally different situation. I don't see how anyone can rationally equate the two. Besides, "two wrongs don't make a right."
 
The government should never have unlimited access to anyone. Now if there is a known terrorist about to do something dangerous, they should be granted "limited" access to information and electronic devices but only after a warrant is issued and not a "blanket warrant" either. Their family should not be harassed unless there is information indicating they too are known terrorists. Anything broken in the suspects home should be replaced by the government if they in fact do any damage.
 
The government as an entity has very little privacy. Most people working in the government have zero say in the government and any monitoring/spying on other Americans, even those who might do so as part of their job.

Those who do that as part of job are doing it out of there own free will,this makes them free game for citizens to spy on them and post certain info.Those who engage in spying should have no problem with other people spying on them or reveling personal info.
 
Last edited:
Government does not enjoy the same rights to privacy and protections that the individuals hold. Government can hold no rights.
 
Back
Top Bottom