2nd Amendment on its way down, here comes the 4th and then the 1st....

[BaiHu]

Most of you already consider this mostly gone anyway, but...

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/12/congress-caves-privacy/

and then this will complete the trifecta:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/12/black-boxes-privacy/?utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=10%20Things%20In%20Tech%20You%20Need%20To %20Know&utm_campaign=Post%20Blast%20%28sai%29%3A%2010%20Th ings%20You%20Need%20To%20Know%20This%20Morning

As Niemöller said:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

[secondstoryguy]

Orwell would be proud.

[LOKNLOD]

Well f*ck me runnin'.

I wonder if the run on 2013 cars will be like the run on pre-ban guns? We just bought the wife a new van this fall, and my truck has no need of replacement, but i would consider buying a new one ahead of such bullshit. I will not be monitored and tracked like a damn criminal on house arrest.

Chickenshit modern Americans will sell their souls themselves for a little discount on their car insurance, though. Just wish they wouldn't sell mine as part of a package deal.

[BaiHu]

Shwew! Glad you folks are coming out now . For a while I thought I was crazy putting these all together ;)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[Odin Bravo One]

I will not be monitored and tracked like a damn criminal on house arrest.


Got a cell phone?

[LOKNLOD]

Got a cell phone?

Yeah, yeah, I know...

[Shellback]

Yet again... Sliding down the slippery slope.

[Haraise]

Ok. I'm going to need to fill you guys in on a fact here.

96% of cars sold this year already have this 'feature.'

They started rolling this out in 1996.

Mercedes-Benz is a major holdout from it, if I remember correctly.

So, buy any benz up until 2013, any car before 1995, or do your homework, if you want to avoid this.

EDIT: The other holdout is Audi.

[cclaxton]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut
Roe v. Wade legalized abortion based on the newly minted Right To Privacy.
I am a strong supporter of choice because I am a strong supporter of the Right to Privacy.

The problem with new technologies, such as medical databases and governmental databases is that they are developing faster than the courts can litigate privacy cases.

Not enough people and money litigating privacy. Another reason is that corporations benefit from the invasion of our privacy. They want to know how to advertise and market to us and how much we are worth, etc. And, of course, the government wants to invade our privacy with secret databases on US citizens. And, in fairness, we benefit from use of these databases, although we are paying too high a price, IMHO.

Will there be a day when everybody knows everything about everybody?....Could be. Or will there be a day when only the privileged will know everything about everybody?....Could be.

CC

[LittleLebowski]

I fear the government a lot more than those eeevil corporations.

[joshs]

I fear the government a lot more than those eeevil corporations.

This. The scariest thing a private entity can do is provide the information to others. In which case, a claim against them for intrusion upon seclusion or public disclosure of private facts would likely accrue.

[BaiHu]

The only 'protected' class will be the uninformed, unproductive, and reliant/dependent class. They will rejoice at first until all of those in the salt mines stop producing and either join them or leave for greener pastures.

[Shellback]

Add this to your list: http://gizmodo.com/5971743/senate-approves-warrantless-phone-tapping-law

[BaiHu]

Add this to your list: http://gizmodo.com/5971743/senate-approves-warrantless-phone-tapping-law

Fantastic...

I know that we've been losing our liberties slowly but surely, but it seems like the assault has ramped up from all directions as of the last 10+ years, no?

In the end, I guess it doesn't really matter about the 1st, 2nd and 4th if we are all economically enslaved. :mad:

[joshs]

Add this to your list: http://gizmodo.com/5971743/senate-approves-warrantless-phone-tapping-law

Just to be clear, FISA and the FAA actually act as a limitation on the executives power to conduct foreign intelligence searches. There is a foreign intelligence exception to the Fourth Amendment, so without FISA and the FAA the executive would be conducting these searches in a completely unregulated manner.

[LittleLebowski]

Fantastic...

I know that we've been losing our liberties slowly but surely, but it seems like the assault has ramped up from all directions as of the last 10+ years, no?

In the end, I guess it doesn't really matter about the 1st, 2nd and 4th if we are all economically enslaved. :mad:

The technology makes it too tempting to the government.

[Shellback]

Just to be clear, FISA and the FAA actually act as a limitation on the executives power to conduct foreign intelligence searches. There is a foreign intelligence exception to the Fourth Amendment, so without FISA and the FAA the executive would be conducting these searches in a completely unregulated manner.

Hmmm... Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I'm off to practice my research skills.

[BaiHu]

Speaking of the 1st Amendment:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255205/Sandy-Hook-shooting-Girl-17-suspended-school-writing-poem-massacre.html

A "zero tolerance policy towards violence" includes discussing or writing about violence in a school? There goes your history class.

[cclaxton]

Speaking of the 1st Amendment:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255205/Sandy-Hook-shooting-Girl-17-suspended-school-writing-poem-massacre.html

A "zero tolerance policy towards violence" includes discussing or writing about violence in a school? There goes your history class.

As it relates to children, the First Amendment has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to only apply in very limited manner related to political speech for children in public schools. But in most other ways students in public schools do not have the same First Amendment protections. They are not allowed to publish whatever they want in the student newspaper, not allowed to speak using obscene language, nor allowed to write whatever they want, nor read whatever they want (unless it is political content).....at school or school-related. http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/childrights/content/notes/landmark_01.html

If she had written this poem at home and kept it at home, then it would have likely been protected unless she published it under her name and where she attends school. (Thus tying it back to her public school).
CC

[BaiHu]

It was her private notebook that a teacher "found" and turned into the principal.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[cclaxton]

It was her private notebook that a teacher "found" and turned into the principal.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

She was at school, my understanding, and students do not have 4th Amendment protections at public schools.
CC

[BaiHu]

She was at school, my understanding, and students do not have 4th Amendment protections at public schools.
CC

I believe you are correct. I wonder if she is 17 or 18 as a senior. Would that have any bearing if she's no longer a minor.

[cclaxton]

I believe you are correct. I wonder if she is 17 or 18 as a senior. Would that have any bearing if she's no longer a minor.

Don't know about 18yo....might have more protection, but for sure...anything they want to inspect to protect school safety would be Constitutional.
CC

[BaiHu]

What is wrong with a girl writing about her feelings of helplessness in regards to Newtown? Even if she has no 1st amendment rights, where's the perceived crime even within the school's loose rules surrounding "a zero tolerance policy towards violence"? That's pretty effin thin as Murtaugh would say to Riggs.

[TGS]

1) You don't know the teachers
2) You don't know the kid
3) You don't know of any history between the two

I can easily see how a teacher would have a legitimate problem, even fear, with what she wrote.

Context is everything.

[BaiHu]

Fair enough. Seems odd no context has been forthcoming given the seriousness in which the school is pursuing this girl's actions.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[TGS]

Fair enough. Seems odd no context has been forthcoming given the seriousness of the school about pursuing this girl's actions.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

Doesn't seem the least bit odd to me. I would think the school has a duty to NOT discuss it with the public. Why would you want them to be reporting intimate details?

At one point you're decrying the destruction of our privacy, and yet you want the government (school system) to give more intimate details on something very personal to this girl.

[BaiHu]

Doesn't seem the least bit odd to me. I would think the school has a duty to NOT discuss it with the public. Why would you want them to be reporting intimate details?

At one point you're decrying the destruction of our privacy, and yet you want the government (school system) to give more intimate details on something very personal to this girl.

Perhaps I was not clear, I am all for her privacy, but if she's not legally allowed to have private thoughts/writings in her school, yet she feels comfortable enough to come public, then what is the school's stance? I think it's a totally different situation when the owner of the thoughts/writings is willing to go public, b/c it is their choice. What I'm ultimately questioning is why do kids have a lack of privacy in our schools? I honestly did not know that kids pretty much have no rights in public school.

[TGS]

Perhaps I was not clear, I am all for her privacy, but if she's not legally allowed to have private thoughts/writings in her school, yet she feels comfortable enough to come public, then what is the school's stance? I think it's a totally different situation when the owner of the thoughts/writings is willing to go public, b/c it is their choice.

If she wants to go public, that's her issue. The system still has privacy standards it has to adhere to.


What I'm ultimately questioning is why do kids have a lack of privacy in our schools? I honestly did not know that kids pretty much have no rights in public school.

Tinker v De Moines, Broussard v Norfolk, Bethel v Fraser and Morse v Frederick would be a good starting point.

[BaiHu]

If she wants to go public, that's her issue. The system still has privacy standards it has to adhere to.



Tinker v Minnesota, Broussard v Norfolk, Bethel v Fraser and Morse v Frederick would be a good starting point.

Thanks, I just don't get the 'you're so dangerous that we need to take you out of school, but not so dangerous that we should alert the authorities.' Either you're violently dangerous or you're not. I'm not saying that I'm correct, I'm just saying that we have a bizarre way of 'protecting' people. When I was in school, you got kicked out for physically being violent or trying to blow up the school.

Two kids are lucky that they didn't grow up today, b/c they made a fake bomb scare when we were sophomores. If they had done that today, we probably never would've seen them again. They are both upstanding citizens today, but they got expelled for a week at the time IIRC. FYI, they were kids that were mad at the world for a time being (wow, it's almost like it's a genetic phase that seems to happen during h.s.) and wanted to close the school down. My gut tells me that if they grew up now, they would've turned into Dylan and Eric of Columbine, b/c of the way we treat kids in today.

[cclaxton]

Students (and probably Parents, too) should be taught the rights and limitations of those rights during orientation at the beginning of each school year. It should be explained that if a student needs to keep something private, it should stay at home. And, if they want to express their political opinion, it has to fit within the narrowly defined rules of Tinker.
CC

[TGS]

Thanks, I just don't get the 'you're so dangerous that we need to take you out of school, but not so dangerous that we should alert the authorities.' Either you're violently dangerous or you're not. I'm not saying that I'm correct, I'm just saying that we have a bizarre way of 'protecting' people. When I was in school, you got kicked out for physically being violent or trying to blow up the school.

You're still making a metric ton of assumptions.

How do you know who they did and did not notify? Not everything warrants a SWAT team or police intervention. For all we know, they could be requesting psych evals for her or some sort of other investigation to her welfare. Or, maybe not. Maybe they did call the police and have them detain her at school until her locker was searched. Maybe this was an over-reaction. Maybe it wasn't; maybe a concerned teacher noticed something that she thought was beginning to cross a line. Maybe she had known something was wrong for a while, and this was the breaking point that was needed to actually initiate whatever measures the school may have been wanting to take, but had no just cause to initiate prior. What about how the passage in the diary was found in the first place? All you know is a teacher saw it and turned it in. How did she see it? Was she snooping through her locker looking to invade her privacy so she could blow nothing out of proportion? Or was it in open sight? Or was she reading it out loud?

Point being: you don't know. You're quarterbacking this thing with little information and understanding, and looking at it heavily biased so it fits what you want to see is happening. If you honestly didn't even understand the limitations on students' rights in schools, that might be a cue to sit this one out on making judgements.


Two kids are lucky that they didn't grow up today, b/c they made a fake bomb scare when we were sophomores. If they had done that today, we probably never would've seen them again. They are both upstanding citizens today, but they got expelled for a week at the time IIRC. FYI, they were kids that were mad at the world for a time being (wow, it's almost like it's a genetic phase that seems to happen during h.s.) and wanted to close the school down. My gut tells me that if they grew up now, they would've turned into Dylan and Eric of Columbine, b/c of the way we treat kids in today.

And, unlike when you went to school, we do have kids committing mass murder. Cue.

[BaiHu]

I trade my assumptions for yours then ;) happy new year.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[TGS]

I trade my assumptions for yours then ;) happy new year.

You'll have to trade for someone else's assumptions as I didn't make any ;)

[BaiHu]

You'll have to trade for someone else's assumptions as I didn't make any ;)

You're so irascible when I'm wrong.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[joshs]

It was her private notebook that a teacher "found" and turned into the principal.

If this was the case then the speech is likely protected and she cannot lawfully be punished for the activity unless it was disruptive.

The first amendment applies normally to private speech by students at school except that the speech cannot be disruptive or advocate illegal drug use. A lot of the confusion about application of the first amendment at schools comes from the distinction the Supreme Court has found between private speech and speech made as part of the curriculum. The latter can be almost totally regulated by the school. Speech made in the school newspaper, as part of a school election, or simply after being called on in a class is all part of the curriculum and subject to heavy regulation.

If the speech is private, then the burden is on the school to show there was a disruption or that the speech advocated illegal drug use. If the school cannot, then the speech is protected and the school may not take adverse action against the student based on the speech.

[BaiHu]

Thanks for the education Josh.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2