NSA's goal is elimination of individual privacy worldwide

[Ricter]

Quote from tomdavis:

If I understand you correctly, you're saying there's no such thing as a "reasonable expectation of privacy."

What I'm saying is, if "guns don't kill people, people kill people", then there is no point in controlling guns (or other even higher leverage weapons), we must control (certain) people. But how do we identify those certain people? We have to delve into everyone's thoughts, to some degree, and look for clues to bigger trouble below.

Naturally, the adult position is a balance between the two approaches, an ideological compromise (OMG no!).

 

[tomdavis]

Quote from Ricter:

What I'm saying is, if "guns don't kill people, people kill people", then there is no point in controlling guns (or other even higher leverage weapons), we must control (certain) people. But how do we identify those certain people? We have to delve into everyone's thoughts, to some degree, and look for clues to bigger trouble below.

Naturally, the adult position is a balance between the two approaches, an ideological compromise (OMG no!).

Where in the Constitution does it give the government the authority to "delve into everyone's thoughts"? And where does it say that we have no rights of privacy?

 

[Ricter]

Quote from tomdavis:

Where in the Constitution does it give the government the authority to "delve into everyone's thoughts"? And where does it say that we have no rights of privacy?

Does the Constitution prohibit the use of spying to learn of an enemy's plans?

Like I said, the adult position is a balance, a balance between pure freedom and pure control.

 

[tomdavis]

Quote from Ricter:

Does the Constitution prohibit the use of spying to learn of the enemy's plans?

Like I said, the adult position is a balance, a balance between total freedom and total control.

The Constitution wasn't written to protect our enemies. It's purpose is to protect US citizens by recognizing our rights. One of those rights is freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. Gathering all communications from American citizens without probable cause and/or a search warrant is unreasonable and unconstitutional.

The adult position is to demand that our government respect the rights granted to us in our Constitution.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Ricter:

Does the Constitution prohibit the use of spying to learn of an enemy's plans?

Like I said, the adult position is a balance, a balance between pure freedom and pure control.

We're rapidly becoming a police state. Some think we're already there. That isn't "balance" moron.

 

[wjk]

Quote from Ricter:

... so long as you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about.

; )

Until the gov decides what you doing is now wrong.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from tomdavis:

The Constitution wasn't written to protect our enemies. It's purpose is to protect US citizens by recognizing our rights. One of those rights is freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. Gathering all communications from American citizens without probable cause and/or a search warrant is unreasonable and unconstitutional.

The adult position is to demand that our government respect the rights granted to us in our Constitution.

Right, and some enemies are internal. And probable cause coming to light may be too late to prevent a big plot, unless you do a little generalized snooping (and arrive at probable cause sooner).

The adult position is to demand that our rights be preserved, and our safety be preserved. Thus, a compromise will be necessary.

 

[wjk]

Quote from Ricter:

Right, and some enemies are internal. And probable cause coming to light may be too late to prevent a big plot, unless you do a little generalized snooping.

And how does this apply to gov powers who consider their political opponents "internal enemies". See Podesta's latest statements about the GOP, or the prez himself referring to tea party persons as "tea baggers" while "rogue agents" of the IRS just happen to coincidently target said "baggers".


Your theory can't hold water if the gov cannot itself be trusted. Therein lies the biggest problem with your balance concept.

 

[tomdavis]

Quote from Ricter:

Right, and some enemies are internal. And probable cause coming to light may be too late to prevent a big plot, unless you do a little generalized snooping (and arrive at probable cause sooner).

The adult position is to demand that our rights be preserved, and our safety be preserved. Thus, a compromise will be necessary.

We should NEVER "compromise" our Constitutional rights. That's how a democracy turns into a police state.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from wjk:

And how does this apply to gov powers who consider their political opponents "internal enemies". See Podesta's latest statements about the GOP, or the prez himself referring to tea party persons as "tea baggers" while "rogue agents" of the IRS just happen to coincidently target said "baggers".


Your theory can't hold water if the gov cannot itself be trusted. Therein lies the biggest problem with your balance concept.

Maybe so, but what society is functioning without government?

"That government is best which governs not at all, and when men are ready for it that is the government they will have.'
- Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

So far, no men anywhere have been ready for it. (Except for those lawless regions and times.)