• Posts: 7,941
  • Tag points: 14

Topic: Right to privacy?

Democrats and Liberals use the statement that the Constitution implies a right to privacy.


So your able to have incest in your bedroom because your bedroom is private?

So your able to murder in your bedroom because it is private and you have the rights of privacy?


No where in the Constitution is the right of privacy guaranteed. Oh there is protections against unlawful searches and seizures, and other protections, but no where in the Constitution is there a right of privacy.



Sadly we Republicans did not fight hard enough on this, and we now suffer under a court which can and will make laws instead of judge circumstances based on laws.

We have a further eroding of the constitution in acts continuously occurring, including attempts to say this and that about the 2nd amendment. Also damaged by the left is the clause about us not having a Federally chosen religion. They have corrupted it to mean there can be no religion near, or on, Federal area's. The intolerance is so strong as to have even Obama deny the Judeo/Christian heritage that influenced our nation and our laws.


Examples abound, and yet... If we were but to voice a loud opinion, and get others to hear it, and agree... that there is a law above laws, and to try to restate it at will is not our desire, we perhaps can recover ourselves to the law again.

Everything bad in the economy is now Obama's fault. Every job lost, all the debt, all the lost retirement funds. All Obama. Are you happy now? We all get to blame Obama!
Kemp currently not being responded to until he makes CONCISE posts.
Avogardo and Noir ignored by me for life so people know why I do not respond to them. (Informational)

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,031
  • Tag points: 671

Re: Right to privacy?

Privacy does not mean lawless flint.

And if it isn't in your constitution, it just goes to show what a crappy document it really is.

NEE NAW NEE NAW

Primo

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 14,366
  • Tag points: 68

Re: Right to privacy?

Well Obama wants judges who will not stop at using the law but consider "outcomes" so I'm sure one outcome will be a ban on right-wing agitation

The core joke of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is that of course no civilization would develop personal computers with instant remote database recovery, and then waste this technology to find good drinks.
Steve Jobs has ruined this joke.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 7,941
  • Tag points: 14

Re: Right to privacy?

If the right were to nominate judges who voted on emotions favoring the right then the standards would be so different than it is now...

Only the left does this.


An example, instead of "right of privacy" we would see a judgment saying "You cannot give welfare, assistance, or any other form of aid from any government body whatsoever according to the constitution"

Everything bad in the economy is now Obama's fault. Every job lost, all the debt, all the lost retirement funds. All Obama. Are you happy now? We all get to blame Obama!
Kemp currently not being responded to until he makes CONCISE posts.
Avogardo and Noir ignored by me for life so people know why I do not respond to them. (Informational)

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,369

Re: Right to privacy?

Are you telling me I don't have the right to do blow off a chick's ass? This information would have been useful BEFORE last night.

[I wish I could obey forum rules]

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 5,595
  • Tag points: 241

Re: Right to privacy?

The right to privacy was an established right under the 9th amendment in the Constitution since shortly after the document was written.


Remember the 9th?  It basically says that, although the Constitution grants people X, Y, and Z rights, those are not the limits of the rights individuals have... meaning they have other rights (including privacy).


As for your slippery slopes... seriously?  That applies to every right!


Should we have freedom of religion?  What if that religion blatantly advocates killing the Jews?  (i.e., US neo-Nazi groups that claimed religious rights)

Freedom of the press?  What if the press uses its power to obtain military secrets?




It's simple: A "freedom" is not absolute.  You have freedoms, but you lose those freedoms once they interfere with another person's ability to exercise their freedoms (generally speaking, that's the way it works).  We don't need to choose between "should we have a right to privacy" and "omg, 13TZ PUT C4M3R4Z 1N 3VRY1'Z B3DR00MZ!"

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 14,366
  • Tag points: 68

Re: Right to privacy?

emanations and penumbras eh?

The core joke of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is that of course no civilization would develop personal computers with instant remote database recovery, and then waste this technology to find good drinks.
Steve Jobs has ruined this joke.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 466
  • Tag points: 46

Re: Right to privacy?

there is no official "right to privacy". It's inferred from some decisions from long back. Oddly most republicans are the chief advocates of these "rights".

Fear not the Darkness, for without it there is no Light. Embrace the Light, for it brings forth Darkness. Embrace both, to embrace the gift of Life. ~Kai Master Creed
Kemralight.COM Contact Me Subscribe to my RSS Feed

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,369

Re: Right to privacy?

When I'm in the shower
I'm afraid to wash my hair
Because I might open my eyes and find someone standing there!

I always feel like
Somebody's watching me
And I have no privacy!

[I wish I could obey forum rules]

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 5,595
  • Tag points: 241

Re: Right to privacy?

Bring a shotgun into the shower, then!

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

11 Reply by Khan_Kell (edited by Khan_Kell 03-May-2009 09:50:22)

  • Posts: 326

Re: Right to privacy?

You have the right to remain silent, that's about the end of the rights you need to know.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Basically, National Guard have the right to bear arms, the rest, not so much.

Away from that, most personal freedoms start and stop at your front door, and exist only so far as thier existence does not infringe on those of others. The state should not have a religion of any kind. Does the US have a Christian backround? Of course. Does that mean that those not of that religion should have to sit through The Lords Prayer when they attend court? Of course not.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 14,366
  • Tag points: 68

Re: Right to privacy?

the national guard was founded in 1906 with the Dick Act.

It was integrated into the Army with the National Defense Act of 1917.

Further integration of Army and Air force National Guard units came with the National Defense Act of 1947.

Prior to 1906 the federal govt did not arm the militia.

Prior to 1898 the self armed, locally mustered militias made up the bulk of fighting forces in Americas wars. 2/3 of troops fighting in the civil war were militia who got their own guns.

Fighting wars is just one of the militias role and I think the recent Court decision was mainly to prevent the British experiment from taking root here. UK has abandoned the doctrine that every person has a right to self defense. UK prosecutes people who fight off attackers if the courts think they didn't try hard enough to run away. America has never had that, we created a second amendment to guarantee collective action to defend ourselves and that's the reason we can gather tools to do it with.

The core joke of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is that of course no civilization would develop personal computers with instant remote database recovery, and then waste this technology to find good drinks.
Steve Jobs has ruined this joke.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,093
  • Tag points: 54

Re: Right to privacy?

> Chris_Balsz wrote:

>  UK has abandoned the doctrine that every person has a right to self defense. UK prosecutes people who fight off attackers if the courts think they didn't try hard enough to run away. <

I believe the law here actually says you are able to strike first if you feel you are in danger.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 312

Re: Right to privacy?

Not that I'm attacking anyone here...

but it must be weird to be a conservative fighting for the right of the government to know what it's people do?


How do you balance that?

Sometimes, there just ain't enough rocks

--Forrest....Forrest Gump

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 5,595
  • Tag points: 241

Re: Right to privacy?

My guess would be it's balanced based on utilitarian calculus, rather than ideology.

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 14,366
  • Tag points: 68

Re: Right to privacy?

ARFeh I'll look for the article on that but an American lawyer was looking at your court cases and you guys are moving away from that--you have a right to fight if the court thinks you had no reasonable chance to evade and that means more and more people being jailed.

Masudian.they not only demand hands off to consenting adults but also to the commerce that supports their shenanigans. At the same time, you can't brew your own whiskey and selling wheat below the govt price is illegal. Maybe if corn liquor were a sexual lubricant...which come to think it is

The core joke of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is that of course no civilization would develop personal computers with instant remote database recovery, and then waste this technology to find good drinks.
Steve Jobs has ruined this joke.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,093
  • Tag points: 54

Re: Right to privacy?

Well all I remembers is a guy who was teaching self-defence once saying that if you feel threatened and you think you're about to be attacked you can attack them first.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,093
  • Tag points: 54

Re: Right to privacy?

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/columnists/article2581201.ece

"As the law stands, if you hurt someone while defending yourself, or while stopping a crime, you won

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,093
  • Tag points: 54

Re: Right to privacy?

http://www.protectingyourself.co.uk/self-defence-law.html

"Public Perception of Self-Defence
There has been confusion about what is permitted under the law when an individual is acting in self-defence. Some have even suggested that the law gives more protection to criminals than to honest citizens acting to protect themselves, their family and their homes. There is a belief that citizens in the USA are in a much stronger position as far as the law on self-defence is concerned.


However, although not enshrined in statute, the law in this country is very clear:

- an individual is entitled to protect themselves or others;
- they may inflict violence and/or use weapons to do so;
- the level of violence may include killing the assailant; and,
- an individual may even act pre-emptively and still be found to have acted in self-defence."

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 14,366
  • Tag points: 68

Re: Right to privacy?

I'll try to find the article because this lawyer was citing case after case where "reasonable levels" of self-defense got victims punished

Anyhow that webpage says get independent legal advice before you rely on it

So check with a lawyer before you premptively konk me on the head

The core joke of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is that of course no civilization would develop personal computers with instant remote database recovery, and then waste this technology to find good drinks.
Steve Jobs has ruined this joke.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,093
  • Tag points: 54

Re: Right to privacy?

Oh no doubt you'll find cases like that, but I imagine they're rare enough to actually merit such attention. I know of loads of stupid cases, like a burglar fell through a skylight, slice his leg on a knife that had been left out on the side and sued the person who owned the house. That might just be hearsay though =P

And anyways, Americans can hardly be pointing the finger at others for having retarded court cases tongue

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 14,366
  • Tag points: 68

Re: Right to privacy?

found it

but it's from 2004

http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v26n2/cpr-26n2-1.pdf

The core joke of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is that of course no civilization would develop personal computers with instant remote database recovery, and then waste this technology to find good drinks.
Steve Jobs has ruined this joke.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • DPS
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 477

Re: Right to privacy?

"Democrats and Liberals use the statement that the Constitution implies a right to privacy.


So your able to have incest in your bedroom because your bedroom is private?

So your able to murder in your bedroom because it is private and you have the rights of privacy?"

Correct me if I'm wrong, I very well may be, but aren't all rights restricited at the point where they infringe upon the rights of others?  Also your rights don't extend beyond the boundaries of the law i.e. you break the law your rights, with some exceptions, don't amount to a hill of beans.

There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,151
  • Tag points: 4

Re: Right to privacy?

I thought the Criminal Justice Bill had already made privacy a crime?
Or was that the JDA?

"So, it's defeat for you, is it? Someday I must meet a similar fate..."

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 93

Re: Right to privacy?

> Einstein wrote:

> Democrats and Liberals use the statement that the Constitution implies a right to privacy.


So your able to have incest in your bedroom because your bedroom is private?

So your able to murder in your bedroom because it is private and you have the rights of privacy?


No where in the Constitution is the right of privacy guaranteed. Oh there is protections against unlawful searches and seizures, and other protections, but no where in the Constitution is there a right of privacy.



Sadly we Republicans did not fight hard enough on this, and we now suffer under a court which can and will make laws instead of judge circumstances based on laws.

We have a further eroding of the constitution in acts continuously occurring, including attempts to say this and that about the 2nd amendment. Also damaged by the left is the clause about us not having a Federally chosen religion. They have corrupted it to mean there can be no religion near, or on, Federal area's. The intolerance is so strong as to have even Obama deny the Judeo/Christian heritage that influenced our nation and our laws.


Examples abound, and yet... If we were but to voice a loud opinion, and get others to hear it, and agree... that there is a law above laws, and to try to restate it at will is not our desire, we perhaps can recover ourselves to the law again.



Obviously the government needs to know who you're fucking, what you are doing at 7:30 PM, etc, etc.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points