So is the NSA security leaker a hero, villian or both?

[Headholio]

you're so mad lol

I understand your point perfectly. it's just that you are using asinine examples to make a weak argument in favor of this being okay.

No you don't get the point, and I'm not saying its ok.

It's not ok because the Patriot act isn't ok. It took away our rights with the excuse that it was to be used to catch terrorists, but has been used in dozens of ways against Americans who have nothing to do with terrorism.
The problem I think, is that any secret program is bound to be abused.
I'm not saying the government shouldn't have the ability to look for terrorism, but it needs to be done in a way that is transparent so that the limits are insured.

But my point about corporate privacy invasion, and everyone bending over and smilinng while they take it in the ass, is still valid.

 

[the_alcatraz]

I believe secrecy is essential for some things to work...if it was transparent, wouldn't the terrorists have access to it?

 

[bigbassturd]

Traz, transparent doesn't mean accessible.

It's an intrusion on our rights as they were written in the constitution, doesn't matter how you govt jockeys try and twist it

All the 'what if' shit doesn't matter.

 

[zwhit]

No you don't get the point, and I'm not saying its ok.

It's not ok because the Patriot act isn't ok. It took away our rights with the excuse that it was to be used to catch terrorists, but has been used in dozens of ways against Americans who have nothing to do with terrorism.
The problem I think, is that any secret program is bound to be abused.
I'm not saying the government shouldn't have the ability to look for terrorism, but it needs to be done in a way that is transparent so that the limits are insured.

But my point about corporate privacy invasion, and everyone bending over and smilinng while they take it in the ass, is still valid.

That's good to know. Because it sure sounded like you were saying that because we choose to use google, own a cell phone, and piss in a cup to get a job, that it's ok for the government to invade our privacy.

Now that we're mostly In agreement, is this where we draw the line In the exchange of freedom/privacy for security?

 

[redsamurai]

You do have the choice not to own a cell phone. .

Cellphones are almost required in the workplace, so much so that a lot of companies give you one that they expect you to use "strictly" for company purposes.

 

[machine23]

Tin foil hat folks are usually indeed crazy.

Kinda torn on this issue. Debating the ethics and balance between privacy and security (which I dont fully buy) aside, from a legality standpoint it sounds as if Congress authorized this and thus it is law. Not many people are aware, but in the 80s when cell phones first began becoming relevant it was determined by the courts that, because the signal is bounced off of towers and not through an actual phone line (on your property), conversations on cell phones came with no reasonable expectation of privacy.

In the eyes of the law, the government tapping into your cell phone signal is no different than a Fed overhearing you talk at the next table in a restaurant. Perhaps that will change due to the public interest in this issue.

That's the dumbest shit I've heard. So if congress passes a law where it's legal to kill blacks and Asians well than that ok since it's law, right?... Come on man. It doesn't make it right whether it's a law or not. Just like slavery wasn't right. Would you get mad if your next door neighbor put listening devices in your house? How about in your car? Why not live in a glasshouse where everyone can monitor each other so that everyone can see that we aren't doing anything illegal.

 

[Mr. dB]

Hero.

 

[billfred]

That's the dumbest shit I've heard. So if congress passes a law where it's legal to kill blacks and Asians well than that ok since it's law, right?... Come on man. It doesn't make it right whether it's a law or not. Just like slavery wasn't right. Would you get mad if your next door neighbor put listening devices in your house? How about in your car? Why not live in a glasshouse where everyone can monitor each other so that everyone can see that we aren't doing anything illegal.

Using your analogy, I think the point is, yes it is ok to kill a black or asian if you know that black or asian is about to kill 100k people for some personal reason.

 

[75th]

That's the dumbest shit I've heard. So if congress passes a law where it's legal to kill blacks and Asians well than that ok since it's law, right?... Come on man. It doesn't make it right whether it's a law or not. Just like slavery wasn't right. Would you get mad if your next door neighbor put listening devices in your house? How about in your car? Why not live in a glasshouse where everyone can monitor each other so that everyone can see that we aren't doing anything illegal.

You do understand there can be a difference between what is "right" and what is "legal," yes?

Congress creates and passes laws. Congress apparently authorized this. For someone who probably walks around screaming "Constitution!" all day (yet I'm sure knows nothing more about the founding fathers than they read on infowars.com) you should know this is how our system of government works.

 

[mrplunkey]

Yes we are protected from government over reach and unreasonable search and seisure. And that's a good thing.
On the other hand, we simply accept the fact that our privacy has been stolen by corporations and there is nothing we can do about it.
Applying for a job? Hand over those bodily fluids for analysis. No reasonable suspicion needed.
Using a computer at work? Every keystroke is logged.
And how convenient those debit cards are. Every single purchase logged. who needs cash!
Etc.

Where are the choices you talk about? The choice to not work? The choice to not own a cell phone? there are only 4 cell companies and they are all the same. The choice to not use a computer? Yeah, those are choices, but for the vast majority we just know that we are being watched, and overall people don't really seem to care that much.

So I am just pointing out the incongruency between people's actions and their so called concern with privacy. Add to that the inexplicable trust people have for the bank or the ISP that is monitoring your every move, vs the paranoia about the government. They all will fuck you.

Interesting argument.

People don't have the right to free speech on private property or even on a lot of public property (i.e. you can't curse-out a judge in court). So would there be a similar incongruency between that and the government simply eliminating the freedom of speech all together?