Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-07-2013, 01:14 AM  
Taco John Taco John is offline
12on Paul
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Casino cash: $6150
Rand Paul to Introduce Fourth Amendment Restoration Act of 2013

Rand Paul to Introduce Fourth Amendment Restoration Act of 2013
Mike Riggs|Jun. 6, 2013 2:24 pm

Gage SkidmoreIn the wake of reports that the NSA has collected millions of phone records from Verizon customers, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) announced today that he will introduce the Fourth Amendment Restoration Act of 2013 tomorrow, Friday, June 7. Here's the release from Paul's office:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Sen. Rand Paul today announced he will introduce the Fourth Amendment Restoration Act of 2013, which ensures the Constitutional protections of the Fourth Amendment are not violated by any government entity.

“The revelation that the NSA has secretly seized the call records of millions of Americans, without probable cause, represents an outrageous abuse of power and a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. I have long argued that Congress must do more to restrict the Executive’s expansive law enforcement powers to seize private records of law-abiding Americans that are held by a third-party,” Sen. Paul said. “When the Senate rushed through a last-minute extension of the FISA Amendments Act late last year, I insisted on a vote on my amendment (SA 3436) to require stronger protections on business records and prohibiting the kind of data-mining this case has revealed. Just last month, I introduced S.1037, the Fourth Amendment Preservation and Protection Act, which would provide exactly the kind of protections that, if enacted, could have prevented these abuses and stopped these increasingly frequent violations of every American’s constitutional rights.

“The bill restores our Constitutional rights and declares that the Fourth Amendment shall not be construed to allow any agency of the United States government to search the phone records of Americans without a warrant based on probable cause.”

http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/06/ra...urth-amendment
Posts: 50,886
Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 10:52 AM   #31
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $6395
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
Amnorix sounds more and more like Mussolini:
"All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."
Sounds like you don't have an argument to make so you're resorting to ad hominem attacks.
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 33,189
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 11:02 AM   #32
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8835
[Amnorix]Whistle while you work
(whistle)Do da do do doodle di
Mussolini bit my wienie
Now it doesn't work! [/Amnorix]
__________________

Last edited by BucEyedPea; 06-07-2013 at 11:07 AM..
Posts: 57,513
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 11:25 AM   #33
Xanathol Xanathol is offline
Starter
 

Join Date: Mar 2011
Casino cash: $5570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade Crapski View Post
The Vichy Regime is as responsible as Obama why Susan Rice, Hilary Clinton, Lois Lerner, Erich Holder et al are not only still employed, but not in jail.
I have a friend that I grew up with that is a US Marshal and oft consider asking him why they haven't started making arrests.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
So I'm not actually taking ANY position on whether the government is doing is reasonable, but I want to point out that those who usually scream loudest about the Constitution not being taken PRECISELY word for word and "liberal" interpretations, etc., don't have a single leg to stand on when they say that the government asking A PHONE COMPANY for records regarding calls is definitely NOT in the Fourth Amendment.

Right of the people to be secure in their

1. persons: Nope, no person was searched, frisked etc.

2. houses: Nope, no house was searched.

3. papers: Nope, no papers.

4. effects. Nope.


This data isn't even THEIRS. It's technically the property of another person altogether, the phone company.

Again, I'm not saying the government is right, I'm just pointing out that all of a sudden Libertarians are finding a very broad "right to privacy" in the 4th Amendment that really isn't there. But "strict construction" goes out the window if/when they want, just like they accuse others of doing.
Ridiculous rhetoric. The amendment obviously applies in the terms of 'paper and effects'. The founding fathers had no concept of the phone, much less the internet, but that in no way excludes those entities from one's belongings.
Posts: 525
Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 11:38 AM   #34
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $6395
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
[Amnorix]Whistle while you work
(whistle)Do da do do doodle di
Mussolini bit my wienie
Now it doesn't work! [/Amnorix]


Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. - Mark Twain
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 33,189
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 11:40 AM   #35
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $6395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xanathol View Post
Ridiculous rhetoric. The amendment obviously applies in the terms of 'paper and effects'. The founding fathers had no concept of the phone, much less the internet, but that in no way excludes those entities from one's belongings.

The data being collected "belongs" to the phone company. They have it. It's clearly in their possession, custody and control.

Look, I'm just saying that if you're usually a "strict constructionist" guy, then there is NO WAY this is a 4th amendment violation. It's not even close.
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 33,189
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 12:04 PM   #36
AustinChief AustinChief is online now
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $6972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
The data being collected "belongs" to the phone company. They have it. It's clearly in their possession, custody and control.

Look, I'm just saying that if you're usually a "strict constructionist" guy, then there is NO WAY this is a 4th amendment violation. It's not even close.
There is a hole in your argument. (not a big one, but a possible hole nonetheless) Your definition of "strict constructionists" seems to apply to those who are pure literalists. I would argue that the term in that sense only applies to loons. (see Buc) The term is much more broadly applied these days and includes people that should instead be regarded as "originalists." There is no hypocrisy for an originalist to claim this violates the intent of the 4th.
Posts: 14,723
AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 12:37 PM   #37
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $6395
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
There is a hole in your argument. (not a big one, but a possible hole nonetheless) Your definition of "strict constructionists" seems to apply to those who are pure literalists. I would argue that the term in that sense only applies to loons. (see Buc) The term is much more broadly applied these days and includes people that should instead be regarded as "originalists." There is no hypocrisy for an originalist to claim this violates the intent of the 4th.

No not really. Obviously there is something of a spectrum relating to strict constructionist over to loose constructionist. It's fair to say, however, that there is no way anyone remotely resembling a strict constructionist can say that the Fourth Amendment applies to prevent a search a seizure of a third party holding information regarding your activities. The phone company isn't you. The records the phone company has are its, and NOT yours. You may have an expectation of privacy as to those phone records based on contract, but certainly not under the Constitution.

You need to have a really expansive interpretation (i.e. loose construction) of the 4th Amendment to find a Constitutional prohibition against the government getting phone company records as being a violation of an individual's rights.

In fact, I can't think off the top of my head of another situation where the 4th amendment is violated by the government getting from Party B information about Party A.
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 33,189
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 12:54 PM   #38
Taco John Taco John is offline
12on Paul
 
Taco John's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2001
Casino cash: $6150


"...we're just collecting them all in case we want to someday."
__________________
Ehyeh asher ehyeh.
Posts: 50,886
Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 01:23 PM   #39
AustinChief AustinChief is online now
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $6972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
No not really. Obviously there is something of a spectrum relating to strict constructionist over to loose constructionist. It's fair to say, however, that there is no way anyone remotely resembling a strict constructionist can say that the Fourth Amendment applies to prevent a search a seizure of a third party holding information regarding your activities. The phone company isn't you. The records the phone company has are its, and NOT yours. You may have an expectation of privacy as to those phone records based on contract, but certainly not under the Constitution.

You need to have a really expansive interpretation (i.e. loose construction) of the 4th Amendment to find a Constitutional prohibition against the government getting phone company records as being a violation of an individual's rights.

In fact, I can't think off the top of my head of another situation where the 4th amendment is violated by the government getting from Party B information about Party A.
I can see your point in what you are assuming is a 3rd party "giving" the government access to records it is keeping. I'm not sure that applies to the scope of what is actually going on though. The NSA is going much farther with its interception of data. But if we limit this simply to phone records, I have serious issues with it but you are right, the Supreme Court has been pretty consistent in regards to third party records not being protected by the 4th.
Posts: 14,723
AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 01:51 PM   #40
Chocolate Hog Chocolate Hog is offline
Winner
 
Chocolate Hog's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: My house
Casino cash: $6590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. - Mark Twain
And that's why I haven't responded to a single post of your support for tyrany.
Posts: 34,400
Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 02:55 PM   #41
Raiderhader Raiderhader is offline
SteelSkull
 
Raiderhader's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Strawberry Hill
Casino cash: $6698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
The data being collected "belongs" to the phone company. They have it. It's clearly in their possession, custody and control.

Look, I'm just saying that if you're usually a "strict constructionist" guy, then there is NO WAY this is a 4th amendment violation. It's not even close.

I can pull up my wireless account that shows my activity that I own because a) they were my actions and b) I paid for the ability to act in that manner. At what point is that not considered in my possession and ownership?
__________________
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, and disregard of all the rules."

-- George Orwell, Shooting an Elephant
Posts: 17,364
Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.Raiderhader threw an interception on a screen pass.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 03:21 PM   #42
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8835
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
There is a hole in your argument. (not a big one, but a possible hole nonetheless) Your definition of "strict constructionists" seems to apply to those who are pure literalists. I would argue that the term in that sense only applies to loons. (see Buc) The term is much more broadly applied these days and includes people that should instead be regarded as "originalists." There is no hypocrisy for an originalist to claim this violates the intent of the 4th.
I see tourettes syndrome hitting you again today. I have claimed to be an "originalist" more than a strict constructionist. And NO, they are not exactly the same thing.
__________________
Posts: 57,513
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 03:33 PM   #43
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8835
Neocons Weep Over Their Mistaken Trust Of Bush

Quote:
...too late, of course, they realize that the Patriot Act guaranteed the destruction of what liberty we had left.

God bless the late Paul Weyrich, who became quite unpopular with them when he warned:

"Never give to your friend any power that your enemy may one day inherit."

Nothing will change. The powerful will never divest voluntarily themselves of power.

In the War for American Independence from the Crown, the colonial patriots relied on the indispensable assistance of the French for success.

On whom will our future patriots depend to defeat the spawn of Cheney, Kristol, Holder, Sebelius, and Napolitano?

The Chinese, perhaps? As hated today as were the French in XVIII century England.

The worm is turning... but it's clear that no domestic entity (Congress? Hah!) will stop the Leviathan. He's thrown away his mask and bared his teeth; the response? "Hey, how do I get on disability?" <---


Link
__________________
Posts: 57,513
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 04:47 PM   #44
listopencil listopencil is online now
sic semper tyrannis
 
listopencil's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Partibus Infidelium
Casino cash: $7475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
Right of the people to be secure in their

1. persons: Nope, no person was searched, frisked etc.

2. houses: Nope, no house was searched.

3. papers: Nope, no papers.

4. effects. Nope.
I think you can make the argument that the phone company owns its phone records, so therefore the customer does not have sole legal ownership of those usage records (especially as opposed to actual conversations), but this is a bit ridiculous. Come on. You can't honestly believe that electronic documents don't meet the legal definition of "papers."
__________________
"As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn't leave my bitterness and hatred behind I'd still be in prison."


Posts: 28,399
listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 05:00 PM   #45
go bowe go bowe is offline
bye bye bo...
 
go bowe's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: independence
Casino cash: $5551
but are they "documents"?

records of numbers called and duration of calls is not any kind of "document" that i'm aware of but i haven't done any research to confirm that...
Posts: 30,018
go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.go bowe 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:29 PM.


This is a test for a client's site.
A new website that shows member-created construction site listings that need fill or have excess fill. Dirt Monkey @ https://DirtMonkey.net
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.