Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
Interesting Twist
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sstterry" data-source="post: 1594838" data-attributes="member: 28912"><p>And therein lies the question. </p><p></p><p>It is not an invasion of privacy to monitor known hate sites, or any other public site for that matter, for "manifestos" such as the El Paso shooter posted (once you post something online, you loose your reasonable expectation of privacy). It is also not an invasion of privacy to follow up on leads received from the general public.</p><p></p><p>It would be a violation of the 4th to hack and monitor private emails and messages without a court-ordered warrant. Think analogous to wiretap. Constitutional law is still trying to catch up to the new technologies.</p><p></p><p>Edit: I want to add that the Patriot Act gave the government wide latitude to use <em>National Security Letters </em>without court oversite to monitor phone conversations and computer and banking records for keywords and suspicious transactions. I am vehemently opposed to that. (A lot of that Act has now been sunsetted)</p><p></p><p>A lot of folks tend to make a distinction between foreign terrorist acts and domestic terrorist acts. I do not see the difference. Radical Islamic or White Nationalist, they should be treated the same.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sstterry, post: 1594838, member: 28912"] And therein lies the question. It is not an invasion of privacy to monitor known hate sites, or any other public site for that matter, for "manifestos" such as the El Paso shooter posted (once you post something online, you loose your reasonable expectation of privacy). It is also not an invasion of privacy to follow up on leads received from the general public. It would be a violation of the 4th to hack and monitor private emails and messages without a court-ordered warrant. Think analogous to wiretap. Constitutional law is still trying to catch up to the new technologies. Edit: I want to add that the Patriot Act gave the government wide latitude to use [i]National Security Letters [/i]without court oversite to monitor phone conversations and computer and banking records for keywords and suspicious transactions. I am vehemently opposed to that. (A lot of that Act has now been sunsetted) A lot of folks tend to make a distinction between foreign terrorist acts and domestic terrorist acts. I do not see the difference. Radical Islamic or White Nationalist, they should be treated the same. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
Interesting Twist
Top