But this is not adhering to that whole 'judicial review' and actually.... Judges are VERY leery to allow the police to 'bash through your door' unless you are a terrorism suspect or they have reason to think that someone is in danger at that very moment.
Since the shooting of the 7 year old girl in the basically home invasion of the WRONG HOUSE in California..... judges have been getting VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY leery of letting the police do these things.
Not in my opinion. Frankly, I'll be blunt: I look at these stuff about pedosexuals and prostitutes in the same light that I do heterosexuals outside of marriage and homosexuals.
The same BS that they are trying to use to demonize the former was tried with the latter, and it was exposed as a bunch of LIES over a period of years.
The anti-pedosexuals and anti-prostitutes are NOT trying to protect children and prostitutes. If they wanted to do that, they would bring pedosexuality and prostitution out into the open and legalize them, instead of forcing them into the darkness where people can be impaled with a sword and no one will ever know.
99% of the problems with those two things can be DIRECTLY linked to trying to keep children IGNORANT (not innocent, there is no such thing) of sex and keeping prostitution illegal.
Good for Backpage. I never understood why Craigslist gave in so easily on this issue. It just didn't make sense, and the Attorney Generals were shooting themselves in the foot if they TRULY thought that people putting these ads on Craigslist were 'dangerous' (with almost all pedosexuals, a dramatic LIE of the worst sort) by sending them somewhere else like to TOR that might be 'more secure'.
Ah, but remember.... with the Non-PATRIOT Act? THey don't need a warrant to wiretap anymore. They can just bullshit about it being a 'national security investigation' and most judges are stupid enough to take their words as rote truth.
I would want this monitoring done so that a cop cannot do the bull that they tried to do with my one relative and say that they saw him breaking into a home when he was a mile away from said home at the time.
Thankfully, a concerned citizen came forwards and said "Bull, at the time this cop is stating, he was getting food at a 7-11!" and the videotapes from the 7-11's surveillance proved the citizen right.
Actually in a lot of cases? The people who own the homes own the LAND underneath the homes as well, so people are not sitting on 'public property'.
Anyway, the whole ruling was supposedly that people don't have a right to 'privacy' in cases where anyone can come onto their property and put something on something.
Load of bullcrap, to be blunt, but apparently the 9th Court was high that day and it got past them.
Apparently for the police it is.... which it should not be in the slightest. I can very well see the police abusing this newfound power that they have.
You are also forgetting that the British have a very obscene habit of being willing to give up personal rights for 'public safety'.... or at least the appearance of that!
Gun control in Britain being a PRIME example of this fact.
This is seriously disgraceful. The whole point of DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT is to allow the citizens total scrutiny into what their government is doing, unless there is a VERY GOOD and sane reasoning why something should be secret.
In the case of ACTA.... that is not met. NOWHERE NEAR being met.
I was going to take the opposite viewpoint to this, but then I remembered the numerous times someone on the internet has taken my statements out of context and made people think I was saying one thing when I was really saying another, so I have to agree that this should be slander.
Whenever someone's statements are being given, it should be THE WHOLE STATEMENT IN QUESTION!
For goodness sakes, you can make someone look like they support rapists by taking their comments out of context, when if you had the ENTIRE statement, you would see that they were saying that we have extended the definition of 'rapist' out too far in their opinion.
Actually, this theory is VERY supportable. For some people, the internet is their only 'social interaction' and something that takes up a lot of their time that they would either spend bored.
As the statement goes "Idle hands are the Devil's playshop!"
Very true, even though I personally don't believe in the 'devil' or 'god'.
When someone is bored, their mind can wander towards things that they normally wouldn't think about.... such as murder and mayhem, just to entertain themselves.
No, that is NOT a sign of 'underlying problems' because all people have had thoughts and dreams of murder and mayhem.... most are just too ashamed of them to admit that they have had them.
In this SOLE CASE, the people were selling their old version to someone else AFTER getting a substantial decrease in price by buying an upgrade version.
The 9th Court should have ruled that in this VERY NARROW CASE.... you do not have the right to resell your bought software.
On the post: How The Attempted Censorship Of File Sharing Sites Avoids Due Process
Re: The catch about due process.
Since the shooting of the 7 year old girl in the basically home invasion of the WRONG HOUSE in California..... judges have been getting VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY leery of letting the police do these things.
On the post: Backpage Tells Attorneys General That They Won't Give In To Censorship Demand
Re: Dumb people...
The same BS that they are trying to use to demonize the former was tried with the latter, and it was exposed as a bunch of LIES over a period of years.
The anti-pedosexuals and anti-prostitutes are NOT trying to protect children and prostitutes. If they wanted to do that, they would bring pedosexuality and prostitution out into the open and legalize them, instead of forcing them into the darkness where people can be impaled with a sword and no one will ever know.
99% of the problems with those two things can be DIRECTLY linked to trying to keep children IGNORANT (not innocent, there is no such thing) of sex and keeping prostitution illegal.
On the post: Backpage Tells Attorneys General That They Won't Give In To Censorship Demand
On the post: Justice Department Insists It Should Be Able To Secretly Stick GPS Devices On Cars Without Warrants
Re:
On the post: Justice Department Insists It Should Be Able To Secretly Stick GPS Devices On Cars Without Warrants
Re:
On the post: Justice Department Insists It Should Be Able To Secretly Stick GPS Devices On Cars Without Warrants
Re: Re: Fine
Thankfully, a concerned citizen came forwards and said "Bull, at the time this cop is stating, he was getting food at a 7-11!" and the videotapes from the 7-11's surveillance proved the citizen right.
On the post: Justice Department Insists It Should Be Able To Secretly Stick GPS Devices On Cars Without Warrants
Re:
Anyway, the whole ruling was supposedly that people don't have a right to 'privacy' in cases where anyone can come onto their property and put something on something.
Load of bullcrap, to be blunt, but apparently the 9th Court was high that day and it got past them.
On the post: Justice Department Insists It Should Be Able To Secretly Stick GPS Devices On Cars Without Warrants
Re:
On the post: Justice Department Insists It Should Be Able To Secretly Stick GPS Devices On Cars Without Warrants
Re: slightly off topic
Gun control in Britain being a PRIME example of this fact.
On the post: Justice Department Insists It Should Be Able To Secretly Stick GPS Devices On Cars Without Warrants
On the post: Latest ACTA Negotiation Kicks Off By Making It Difficult For Consumer Rights Groups To Attend
In the case of ACTA.... that is not met. NOWHERE NEAR being met.
On the post: Is Quoting Someone Out Of Context Defamation?
Re: WTF?
I see this as being a BOON with the news organizations and making things a lot more fair.
On the post: Is Quoting Someone Out Of Context Defamation?
Re:
Whenever someone's statements are being given, it should be THE WHOLE STATEMENT IN QUESTION!
For goodness sakes, you can make someone look like they support rapists by taking their comments out of context, when if you had the ENTIRE statement, you would see that they were saying that we have extended the definition of 'rapist' out too far in their opinion.
On the post: Court Won't Rehear Pay-For-Delay Patent Lawsuit; We Pay, They Delay
On the post: Could Cutting People Off From The Internet Be Dangerous?
As the statement goes "Idle hands are the Devil's playshop!"
Very true, even though I personally don't believe in the 'devil' or 'god'.
When someone is bored, their mind can wander towards things that they normally wouldn't think about.... such as murder and mayhem, just to entertain themselves.
No, that is NOT a sign of 'underlying problems' because all people have had thoughts and dreams of murder and mayhem.... most are just too ashamed of them to admit that they have had them.
On the post: Bait & Switch: O2 iPad Customers Told Data Allowance Cut Up To Two Thirds
On the post: Denial Of Service Attacks On RIAA & MPAA Are A Really Dumb Idea
On the post: Appeals Court Destroys First Sale; You Don't Own Your Software Anymore
Re:
It's only EA games that insist on activation before playing or an 'always on' internet connection.
On the post: Appeals Court Destroys First Sale; You Don't Own Your Software Anymore
Re:
The 9th Court should have ruled that in this VERY NARROW CASE.... you do not have the right to resell your bought software.
On the post: Appeals Court Destroys First Sale; You Don't Own Your Software Anymore
Seriously, what the 9th Court says is WORTHLESS in almost all cases.
Next >>