• 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

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

Yes. Obviously. What does that have to do with FOIA?


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.

Not really. What the EPA does is wildly distinguishable from what private entities do internally in quite a lot of different ways.
 
I'm still trying to figure out why anyone would have voted for that bill, regardless of 9/11.
There were parts of the act that made sense, unfortunately it was written broadly enough for abuse. I like Law enforcement and military having an implied right to CCW at all times even after retirement, I like expanding due process and probable cause to those who could stop immediate attacks, but it came at a cost of breaches of privacy to upstanding citizens. It could be a decent bill if revisited and the abuses tweaked out of it.
 
There were parts of the act that made sense, unfortunately it was written broadly enough for abuse. I like Law enforcement and military having an implied right to CCW at all times even after retirement, I like expanding due process and probable cause to those who could stop immediate attacks, but it came at a cost of breaches of privacy to upstanding citizens. It could be a decent bill if revisited and the abuses tweaked out of it.

Not with this administration, hell, they can't even call terrorism what it is.
 
CNET provided a link to the text.
:shrug:

http://www.leahy.senate.gov/imo/med...onicCommunicationsPrivacyActAmendmentsAct.pdf

Is that anything like a source?

After reading the link I found out that the main reason for this bill is: ‘‘(A) endangering the life or physical safety
22 of an individual;
23 ‘‘(B) flight from prosecution;
24 ‘‘(C) destruction of or tampering with evi25
dence;".

I believe this is an excellent reason for this bill.

Also the bill is related to telemarketers who constantly rip consumers off.
 
After reading the link I found out that the main reason for this bill is: ‘‘(A) endangering the life or physical safety
22 of an individual;
23 ‘‘(B) flight from prosecution;
24 ‘‘(C) destruction of or tampering with evi25
dence;".

I believe this is an excellent reason for this bill.

Also the bill is related to telemarketers who constantly rip consumers off.

I automatically don't believe in this bill when I see **** like this. This rhetoric is designed to sell something to the masses. The devil is in the details my friend.
 
I automatically don't believe in this bill when I see **** like this. This rhetoric is designed to sell something to the masses. The devil is in the details my friend.

Who on this forum has not been ripped of by a telescam or an internet scam.? I know I have.
 
My advce toanyone who does not like this bill, read it, then write your congressmen to offer your opinions to them.

Youwould be amazxed at the results.\

That's the reason that we are a great country.
 
The Patriot Act already allows GPS tracking..... In theory the Patriot Act would allow government to microchip individuals...

Please provide section number of the USA PATRIOT Act that could "in theory" allow the government to microchip individuals?
 
Not with this administration, hell, they can't even call terrorism what it is.
I'm not trusting anyone in D.C. to get rid of the troubling parts at this time, hell they issued the NDAA, and are trying to pass this turkey. It's going to take people who seriously value American constitutional law to undo this mess.
 
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.
Even if the SCOTUS strikes it down eventually, that takes time and money. Money that the average person doesn't have, and time that will be used to full effect in violating people's rights in the meantime.


I don't think Republican Senators will be against this very hard.

The issue here isn't left vs. right. Rather, it's power vs. the people.

And Republicans want that power when they're in charge just as much as Democrats do.
Quote for truth.
 
Even if the SCOTUS strikes it down eventually, that takes time and money. Money that the average person doesn't have, and time that will be used to full effect in violating people's rights in the meantime.

That all depends on what the lower courst do. It's very common in a situation like this for a court to order that the new law be put on hold pending judicial determination of constitutionality.
 
That all depends on what the lower courst do. It's very common in a situation like this for a court to order that the new law be put on hold pending judicial determination of constitutionality.
That does happen at times, yes. It's not as standard as it should be, though.

Sometimes I think we should establish a system of "pre-qualifying" new laws prior to them taking effect. (That has pros and cons, though.)
 
That does happen at times, yes. It's not as standard as it should be, though.

Sometimes I think we should establish a system of "pre-qualifying" new laws prior to them taking effect. (That has pros and cons, though.)

There are countries that do that. I would think the biggest problem would be setting aside court resources to vet every law passed by congress.
 
Who on this forum has not been ripped of by a telescam or an internet scam.? I know I have.

Aside from the time wasted in dealing with them, I haven't.

Not all of us have ever been dumb enough to fall for the sort of blatant scams that get promoted by such methods.
 
Aside from the time wasted in dealing with them, I haven't.

Not all of us have ever been dumb enough to fall for the sort of blatant scams that get promoted by such methods.

Are you insinuating that I am dumb?
 
Please provide section number of the USA PATRIOT Act that could "in theory" allow the government to microchip individuals?

There is no "section number" that is the whole point of the Patriot Act... Suspicion is enough....
 
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.

If your not doing anything wrong....right? Is it just that now that it's Obama instead of Bush in the oval office that these horrible, constitution breaching, freedom hating power grabs are.so worry some?
 
Who on this forum has not been ripped of by a telescam or an internet scam.? I know I have.

Aside from the time wasted in dealing with them, I haven't.

Not all of us have ever been dumb enough to fall for the sort of blatant scams that get promoted by such methods.

Are you insinuating that I am dumb?

Dumb, foolish, gullible, a sucker, whatever. Pick a word.

I've been around for a very long time. I've been on the Internet since long before most people knew that any such thing did or would exist. I've probably been exposed to just about every scam there is, through just about every medium in which such scams are propagated. And I've always been smart enough to recognize a scam when I saw it. So have most of the people I've known. So, I bet, have most of the people on this forum.
 
Going to chime in here on the Patriot Act.

It in no way protects us. It is a irrational piece of legislation that gives government powers it should never have, The Patriot Act should be repealed in full. There is no part of it that makes any sort of sense when it restricts freedoms. We don't need it, and our country would be better off without. For that matter, abolishing Homeland Security and the TSA would be great steps as well. We have no use for them either.
 
Dumb, foolish, gullible, a sucker, whatever. Pick a word.

I've been around for a very long time. I've been on the Internet since long before most people knew that any such thing did or would exist. I've probably been exposed to just about every scam there is, through just about every medium in which such scams are propagated. And I've always been smart enough to recognize a scam when I saw it. So have most of the people I've known. So, I bet, have most of the people on this forum.
Everybody, at some time in their life, has fallen for something from somebody. Everybody.

As far as internet and phone scams, I agree that the vast majority of people are smart enough to spot them. But, it seems that the majority of people who do fall for them are older people... older people that only a decade or two earlier were just like you and me and would never fall for them. I've seen discussions on why older people are more susceptible when that same person wouldn't have been before, but have never read anything conclusive.
 
There is no "section number" that is the whole point of the Patriot Act... Suspicion is enough....

What? You're saying the Patriot Act grants secret powers that aren't actually listed in the Patriot Act?
 
I am surprised at the assumption of privacy in any email. I have long assumed all public emails are
gleaned for marketing and other data.
Several years ago, I planned a business trip, and sent a copy of my itinerary to my home (public) email.
For the next six weeks I got adds for hotels and rental cars for my destination.
I will go out on a limb, and say they did not guess where I was going. My point is if the marketers are processing the public email,
is it unbelievable that the government is processing it first.
 
What? You're saying the Patriot Act grants secret powers that aren't actually listed in the Patriot Act?

Yes, that is the point of the Patriot Act.

What do you think warrantless wiretapping means? Also, you do realize the government can circumvent due process and hold you indefinitely if they suspect you're a "terrorist?"

In short - if the government suspects you're a terrorist they can throw your ass in a basement cell and throw away the key. The only problem is that "terrorist" is a loose term - hell, some progressives have attempted to label the Tea Party as "terrorists." The Patriot Act is extremely dangerous and subject to the slippery slope.

The Patriot Act allows the federal government to completely circumvent civil liberties (Bill of Rights/Constitutional rights) and lock you up if they believe you're a terrorist - foreign or domestic. The act also allows the government to spy on you and invade your privacy without a warrant... Presently the FBI doesn't need a search warrant to break down your door and search your home via the Patriot Act - all they have to conclude is that you MAY be a suspected terrorist and that is enough to justify their search.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom