Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Atlas, Feb 13, 2010.
In a word, "NO!"
Hey there - loved your response since I used to live in Columbia - and worked just a few miles away from there - wanna guess where?
This is akin to what the SIGINT world calls "traffic analysis".
No way. That's the same as strapping a GPS tracker on my leg and seeing where I've been. Get a warrant first.
There are two separate questions here.
Should it be allowed?
Is it constitutional?
I would prefer that the government not have routine access to those records. However, the .gov case is the right one: Joe Customer has no expectation of privacy in records that belong to the business. Right now, there is some geek who can track the data. The historic locations of Joe's phone is already known to third parties, and he can't tell the business what to do with its records.
The proper answer is for Congress to pass a law, not for the judge to make one from the bench.
Well, several years back they wire-tapped us without warrant, is this really any different?
I don't agree with either behavior but there were certainly a bucketload of supporters of the illegal wire taps on this site due to the administration that authorized them.
You are of course correct.
But it seems this President doesn't mind leaning to the right when it serves his purposes. That's appears to be the way of 'em all though.
Where you worked isn't too difficult to tell as I still work there and yes, I'm familiar with "traffic analysis," even though I didn't deal with it as an ELINT analyst...but my friends in COMINT sure do.
This is the same kind of issue that I hope this agency stays the hell out of as it concerns U.S. citizens, especially since the USSIDs don't allow for it to be done. Then again, how often has this agency ignored those USSIDs when it was (or still is) politically expedient? PATRIOT Act, anyone?
If you've ever paid for anything with a credit card at more than one business, your CC number meets the criteria of 'known to third parties' and 'in the records owned by the business'.
Would you say you have no expectation of privacy?
And people wonder why I refuse to own a cell phone too! This is but one of many reasons. But a good one in my book!
Currently, law enforcement agencies need to get a court order in order to obtain cell phone records. We can not go requesting any records we want for any reason. We need reasonable suspicion to obtain a court order, which is a lower level of proof than probable cause. However, we still need some reason to suspect a person in a crime before being able to get the court order.
Justice department =
Yes, I would say that.
You're giving the information to pimple-faced waiters. Your credit card company is (probably, there may be exceptions) selling customer lists and tracking buying patterns for targeted marketing. It's not reasonable to believe that your information *isn't* out there---you're not dealing with your lawyer or priest. If your credit card company can give their records to Mass Media Marketing Inc. they can give it to the .gov.
It's not your information. It's the company's information about you.
If we want to pass a law restricting the .gov from seeking this information absent an order, that's fine with me; in fact, I'd like that law. That doesn't mean that I want the judge to legislate from the bench. Separation of powers is just as important to me as the other parts of the Constitution.
It depends.... are they Muslim?
I do have an expectation of privacy on my phones. I also believe this kind of nonsense is why throw away phones are so popular. Just Obama trying to get into everyone's business. Next, they will want to put fart monitors on our bodies.
Don't give Obama any ideas otherwise we just might have to purchase carbon credits before eating Mexican food to off-set the amount of methane we'll release into the atmosphere?
Like I said in a different thread- why don't they just make it so everyone is born into incarceration, then after they prove they aren't a criminal they may be released?
Seems to me that is the end game anyway...