General Discussion

Volaris

(11,788 posts)

29. "...is pretty easily argued as being the property of the phone company..."

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 01:06 AM

Jun 2013

not if the phone company doesn't (as an Incorporated entity) have a Constitutional Right to claim ownership of that property in the first place.

Search and Seziure of Personal papers and Property was a damn-sight easier at the time of the writing of the 4th, because it was JUST Persons that the Government had to worry about dealing with within the bounds of Law. At the time, corporations were NOT allowed legally to own property, papers, or anything of the sort that the Government would need a Warrant to confiscate. Take out the middleman, as it were, and you sure as hell have a sound Legal argument that Uncle Sam overstepped The Line...but as long as that data belongs to "Them" (the Corps.) and not "Me", (the Person) well, then "THEY" can do whatever the hell they want with it. Warrant from the Government, or no.

(If Republican, small government telecom CEO's really were as believing in Small Government as they like to claim, one would like to think they would have told the Big, Bad Govt. to come back with a Warrant, or bugger off. This is just more proof that they ONLY dislike Govt when it works AGAINST their monetary interest.)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

103 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

We are being manipulated to miss the point. [View all] woo me with science Jun 2013 OP

They're trying to find probable cause. And that crosses a line. Gregorian Jun 2013 #1

How else will they nineteen50 Jun 2013 #65

Exactly, this has nothing to do with "terrorism", and all to do with the new corporate police-state. Civilization2 Jun 2013 #69

They control protest & real descent by... SkyDaddy7 Jun 2013 #77

Keep telling yourself that. nineteen50 Jun 2013 #79

Please prove me wrong?!?! SkyDaddy7 Jun 2013 #80

What do you think happened to nineteen50 Jun 2013 #82

First of all, even if the local authorities are doing worse doesnt justify the NSA doing the same. rhett o rick Jun 2013 #92

Ahhh, Local Police Forces do not have those capabilities, bvar22 Jun 2013 #94

Checking your cell phone to see if you've been in a place that serves liquor (nt) Babel_17 Jun 2013 #83

Nobody is saying that you broke any laws, what we're saying is... dkf Jun 2013 #2

Actually, ProSense Jun 2013 #3

the debate is about the right of the government to preemptively harvest and store ALL our usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #5

The date of a court decision isn't much of a factor in US jurisprudence. cheapdate Jun 2013 #25

Here's a link to the full-text opinion of Smith v. Maryland, 1855 AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #31

That description of the precedent established in Smith v. Maryland, 1855 cheapdate Jun 2013 #56

1979 - Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979)? AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #35

But if the American people are smart enough to stand up truedelphi Jun 2013 #38

It's up to the People to object marions ghost Jun 2013 #53

True and that ruling doesn't cover what we are talking about today usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #48

+1. Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) - No warrant required for call metadata graham4anything Jun 2013 #51

You need to read Smith v Maryland where it doesn't actually say that, or at least # 3 above. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #58

1979. That was long before the government had this massive JDPriestly Jun 2013 #88

Look at guns, when the 2nd was written, they were talking about cannons and such. graham4anything Jun 2013 #89

Thanks for illustrating the ops point. L0oniX Jun 2013 #64

Can't help but notice Android3.14 Jun 2013 #68

Founding fathers explicitly sanctioned JaneyVee Jun 2013 #4

LOL. GoneFishin Jun 2013 #8

Founding fathers explicitly outlawed brett_jv Jun 2013 #13

Except that, in your example, they did. Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #37

WTF? CrispyQ Jun 2013 #57

Just tired of right-wing idiocy being thrown out in quantities suitable to yahoo or Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #74

Got it. CrispyQ Jun 2013 #101

Awww, having a bad day, or just want to show everyone what league you really should be in? n/t A Simple Game Jun 2013 #66

I'm sorry, did you have a point, or is it just a need to defend wrong? n/t Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #75

I'm sorry you seem to have misunderstood, I wasn't defending you. n/t A Simple Game Jun 2013 #90

When all else fails go to the snark. nm rhett o rick Jun 2013 #93

Snark that makes the point is grist for the mill. What would be DU w/o snark... Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #96

I'll bet Benjamin Frankin is spinning in his grave dflprincess Jun 2013 #6

I think we just solved the world's energy crisis! backscatter712 Jun 2013 #19

Apparently some people enjoy taking a crap on the Constitution. limpyhobbler Jun 2013 #7

Probably cause PARTICULARLY DESCRIBING the things to be seized. snot Jun 2013 #9

sorry Woo...it's all ok cuz the courts have said it's "legal" according to them only nt msongs Jun 2013 #10

The courts said slavery was legal, and black people weren't human beings. backscatter712 Jun 2013 #20

There is a question as to whether a person has a right of privacy to a LOG of activities. Honeycombe8 Jun 2013 #11

Well, we do know that we don't own the Internet, so that by not 'owning' it... Amonester Jun 2013 #12

No, it has not ... brett_jv Jun 2013 #18

Like, if YOU don't want anyone to sneek on what you consider YOUR privacy... Amonester Jun 2013 #24

"...is pretty easily argued as being the property of the phone company..." Volaris Jun 2013 #29

Seems pretty clear to me... zeemike Jun 2013 #21

K&R! I cannot believe anyone here, ANYONE, would even suggest the suspension Fire Walk With Me Jun 2013 #14

Thank you. Very well said. DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2013 #16

Things will not be made right unless and until they erase the database. reformist2 Jun 2013 #15

The 4th Amendment Has Been On Life Support For A Long Time DallasNE Jun 2013 #17

Not to mention all of the bullshit searches at the LibDemAlways Jun 2013 #23

The government sanctioned feel-ups, even random ones, are outrageous. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #32

Being forced into an x-ray or feel up, with no LibDemAlways Jun 2013 #36

And meanwhile, the Saudi family that had supported Mohammed Atta truedelphi Jun 2013 #40

Even WORSE when they've PLANTED the joint in your pocket. Amonester Jun 2013 #26

K&R suffragette Jun 2013 #22

Probable cause is awfully "wobbly" Scootaloo Jun 2013 #27

DURec leftstreet Jun 2013 #28

Good luck getting n answer to that question. I have asked, but got the run around mostly. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #30

And don't you get the feeling that a lot of this is being done truedelphi Jun 2013 #41

Absolutely! I said yesterday that we should 'follow the money' to find out why they are keeping sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #42

Sadly, don't you also get the feeling that we will never get that investigation? truedelphi Jun 2013 #43

Well, they may be forced to do something, but I am not stupid enough to think that if they are sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #44

And Clapper was appointed Director of NSA by.... wait for it.... Melinda Jun 2013 #72

Case law Life Long Dem Jun 2013 #33

What Does "Effects" Mean In The 4th Amendment DallasNE Jun 2013 #45

I'd say effects means 'personal property' Life Long Dem Jun 2013 #63

What has happened to this country? Where's the outrage from the ABA? Or from other Bar Associations? AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #34

You kidding? If anyone can tell which way the wind is blowing, it's attorneys. n/t Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #39

The Communist Menace has become the Islamist Menace octoberlib Jun 2013 #46

Well said - An excellent OP TakeALeftTurn Jun 2013 #47

k&r n/t RainDog Jun 2013 #49

all I've learned this week is that we should save our rage and aim it at the next Repub president. piratefish08 Jun 2013 #50

Why not just never elect another Bush, that would be more productive of course. graham4anything Jun 2013 #52

I'm not aware of efforts to distance the 4th Amendment from the argument. joshcryer Jun 2013 #54

Hmm ... Laelth Jun 2013 #55

"we need new guidance from the SCOTUS"? What if the SCOTUS is in the tank on this one? AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #60

They may be. Laelth Jun 2013 #61

Sooner or later, the general public is going to learn that Justice Kagan was opposed to AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #62

Oh, but woo, we're being told that people who live in the "real world" Zorra Jun 2013 #59

I find your 4th amendment analysis facile, like 2nd amendment analysis msanthrope Jun 2013 #67

It is as though the current folks in Washington Vinnie From Indy Jun 2013 #70

Think this is bad? This is the same government that claims the right to KILL Americans... Demo_Chris Jun 2013 #71

well... Locrian Jun 2013 #73

Not to stir up trouble, but what do we, the little guys, do about this? WHEN CRABS ROAR Jun 2013 #76

I think many people around here never took civics, felix_numinous Jun 2013 #78

K & R !!! WillyT Jun 2013 #81

"On what probable cause does the US government have the right...?" Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2013 #84

Ah, memories! backscatter712 Jun 2013 #85

Am I missing something or is this generational? sevenseas Jun 2013 #86

I have it on good authority that a lot of that fear in the fifties WHEN CRABS ROAR Jun 2013 #87

Don't trust the apologists/cheerleaders/sock puppets. blkmusclmachine Jun 2013 #91

What this guy said. ^ bvar22 Jun 2013 #95

Big brother probably has probable cause to believe if billions of communications are harvested and indepat Jun 2013 #97

I was pissed when W started this shit...now obama continues it...im terrified.... CarrieLynne Jun 2013 #98

We are being manipulated to disregard the CONSTITUTION. I'm stunned and ashamed at some reactions. chimpymustgo Jun 2013 #99

FIGHT THIS Canuckistanian Jun 2013 #100

Thank you. K&R nt TBF Jun 2013 #102

Now this is a balanced response. kitt6 Jun 2013 #103