Snowden Situation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-07-2013, 11:11 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(27-07-2013 11:02 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 10:44 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  I think it is a bad thing. Someone has to figure out how to provide all promised rights to the one in question while allowing them a lawyer in a court first. Then, in this court it must be proven that they are sufficiently suspected of a crime or future crime. This being done, we have to figure out how to not scare them into being super careful in their communication methods. The day all this is done is the day it will be a good thing. In all cases, there cannot be any infringes on rights to anyone no matter how suspected they are. I realize that this will probably never happen but I would really like the government to be more sneaky if they want to break the law.

Do you know how warrants work? I'm not being sarcastic here I just don't think they work how you think they do. Your lawyer is never present when one is issued. The main difference between a public warrant and a private one is if it is entered into the public record not how the court works. To obtain a warrant all the police (or FBI CIA NSA etc) need to do is show probable cause to a judge (any judge in the district) the Judge doesn't even need to be actively sitting in court (in fact most of the time they are not) they just need to sign the warrant. Now for normal Warrants different Judges have different levels of evidence necessary to issue a warrant (it is very much an old boys club) but even they are not 100%. That is the problem with the rubber stamp not that it is kept classified, the fact that the warrants are never even challenged by the judges.

Yes... that is part of the problem, the whole back door over the phone secret warrant business seems weird to me. In the FISA courts it seems like the most unfair and secretive way to do the process one could think of. The members of FISA don't have proof for any of this process, it is just a case of where we have to take it for their word that they are justified in signing it. I think they should have to show something that justifies their claims of suspicion. If this happened the process would be so much more acceptable, at least to me.

[Image: g-HitchensThinkSelf.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 11:14 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(27-07-2013 11:03 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 10:47 PM)ridethespiral Wrote:  Nah the old ones be right yet again.

See the world is a far shittier and more inefficient place than you can possibly understand. Nothing runs the way it should in practice...

How to make a congress - Mix 2 parts tea party nutbag with a 3 parts career politician looking to make it big in retirement, 2 parts geriatric incumbent and 1 part rational good intentioned human being, pour into a highball glass over a generous portion of money, garnish with filibuster and serve.

Social security. Not for you, sorry.
Upward Mobility. Not likely

You want to take the red pill read 'A Peoples History of the United States' by Howard Zinn. They even made a graphic novel out of it if you just want a cliffnotes understanding.

I know that our congress is fucked to bits, but that still isn't a reason to give up on what we want it to be is it? I know that most congressmen are selfish bastards only looking out for themselves but that is no reason to throw our hands up and say the ideal is impossible. I'm not a little kid totally naive to all the ways of the world, I know it is shitty out there, I just think we atheists need to do our best to make it a better place because we all know no one else will. I want to be part of the solution not part of the problem, call me naive if you wish.

You just need to understand the apathy is what I'm trying to say. There is plenty of stuff to be enraged about, and fighting the good fight takes a lot out of you. Progress is a long slow thing.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 11:16 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(27-07-2013 10:50 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 10:46 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  I wouldn't count on that happening we are now at 12 years and counting and I don't see any rush by either party to remove that act. The problem is the general malaise of the public to things like this. The masses don't care or don't know so there is no impulse to act.

I actually remain more hopeful that will happen than it will be struck down as being illegal.

But overall I do agree with you.

Guys it's fine to tell me that I don't understand something totally because I don't have enough experience, in fact I invite it. I just ask that maybe you show me where I went wrong rather than tell me I am a naive teenage idiot. At least I am trying to figure this shit out.

[Image: g-HitchensThinkSelf.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 11:17 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(27-07-2013 11:11 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 11:02 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Do you know how warrants work? I'm not being sarcastic here I just don't think they work how you think they do. Your lawyer is never present when one is issued. The main difference between a public warrant and a private one is if it is entered into the public record not how the court works. To obtain a warrant all the police (or FBI CIA NSA etc) need to do is show probable cause to a judge (any judge in the district) the Judge doesn't even need to be actively sitting in court (in fact most of the time they are not) they just need to sign the warrant. Now for normal Warrants different Judges have different levels of evidence necessary to issue a warrant (it is very much an old boys club) but even they are not 100%. That is the problem with the rubber stamp not that it is kept classified, the fact that the warrants are never even challenged by the judges.

Yes... that is part of the problem, the whole back door over the phone secret warrant business seems weird to me. In the FISA courts it seems like the most unfair and secretive way to do the process one could think of. The members of FISA don't have proof for any of this process, it is just a case of where we have to take it for their word that they are justified in signing it. I think they should have to show something that justifies their claims of suspicion. If this happened the process would be so much more acceptable, at least to me.

As I said this is the part that has me most concerned. The fact that spy agencies be creepin is not news to anyone that pays attention, it's what they do. But the courts are supposed to be a check on executive power and in this case they are acting in collusion.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 11:20 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(27-07-2013 11:02 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 10:44 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  I think it is a bad thing. Someone has to figure out how to provide all promised rights to the one in question while allowing them a lawyer in a court first. Then, in this court it must be proven that they are sufficiently suspected of a crime or future crime. This being done, we have to figure out how to not scare them into being super careful in their communication methods. The day all this is done is the day it will be a good thing. In all cases, there cannot be any infringes on rights to anyone no matter how suspected they are. I realize that this will probably never happen but I would really like the government to be more sneaky if they want to break the law.

Do you know how warrants work? I'm not being sarcastic here I just don't think they work how you think they do. Your lawyer is never present when one is issued. The main difference between a public warrant and a private one is if it is entered into the public record not how the court works. To obtain a warrant all the police (or FBI CIA NSA etc) need to do is show probable cause to a judge (any judge in the district) the Judge doesn't even need to be actively sitting in court (in fact most of the time they are not) they just need to sign the warrant. Now for normal Warrants different Judges have different levels of evidence necessary to issue a warrant (it is very much an old boys club) but even they are not 100%. That is the problem with the rubber stamp not that it is kept classified, the fact that the warrants are never even challenged by the judges.

The other side of it is, no judge wants to be 'that guy' who could have stopped something very bad because he didn't sign the warrant. I've known a few judges who worry constantly about making that mistake. It's a balancing act.

But overall, I do agree, but also remember other judges can still determine what evidence is allowed into court. If they feel the evidence was outside the scope of the warrant -- or the warrant was wrong outright, they can and will toss out the evidence.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
27-07-2013, 11:20 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(27-07-2013 11:17 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 11:11 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  Yes... that is part of the problem, the whole back door over the phone secret warrant business seems weird to me. In the FISA courts it seems like the most unfair and secretive way to do the process one could think of. The members of FISA don't have proof for any of this process, it is just a case of where we have to take it for their word that they are justified in signing it. I think they should have to show something that justifies their claims of suspicion. If this happened the process would be so much more acceptable, at least to me.

As I said this is the part that has me most concerned. The fact that spy agencies be creepin is not news to anyone that pays attention, it's what they do. But the courts are supposed to be a check on executive power and in this case they are acting in collusion.

Yes, I feel exactly the same way. We will never get the spy agencies to stop looking through our stuff, but the courts at least should show some evidence somehow if they give a warrant to listen to all our shit unconditionally. But this, then again, will probably never happen.

[Image: g-HitchensThinkSelf.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 11:23 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(27-07-2013 11:16 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 10:50 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I actually remain more hopeful that will happen than it will be struck down as being illegal.

But overall I do agree with you.

Guys it's fine to tell me that I don't understand something totally because I don't have enough experience, in fact I invite it. I just ask that maybe you show me where I went wrong rather than tell me I am a naive teenage idiot. At least I am trying to figure this shit out.

What did you think we were doing for 100+ posts? I will say the fact that I know you are as young as you are has granted you a lot more leeway from me than I would normally grant. I have not gone negative with you because I remember being an Idealistic 15 yo I have even asked others to grant you additional leeway for that fact. Sorry A2 I know you dislike age being brought in but experience matters and youth limits experience. I do commend your passion and I hope you keep it as you grow older we need more people willing to stand up and be counted in this country most of the masses are willfully ignorant of even the basic matters.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 11:29 PM
RE: Snowden Situation
(27-07-2013 11:23 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 11:16 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  Guys it's fine to tell me that I don't understand something totally because I don't have enough experience, in fact I invite it. I just ask that maybe you show me where I went wrong rather than tell me I am a naive teenage idiot. At least I am trying to figure this shit out.

What did you think we were doing for 100+ posts? I will say the fact that I know you are as young as you are has granted you a lot more leeway from me than I would normally grant. I have not gone negative with you because I remember being an Idealistic 15 yo I have even asked others to grant you additional leeway for that fact. Sorry A2 I know you dislike age being brought in but experience matters and youth limits experience. I do commend your passion and I hope you keep it as you grow older we need more people willing to stand up and be counted in this country most of the masses are willfully ignorant of even the basic matters.

I just didn't understand why you were hounding me about the whole legal illegal thing. I thought that being unconstitutional made things illegal but apparently not. But hey, you learn something new everyday. Big Grin That is really the only issue we were having if I remember correctly, but you are right I can be stubborn at times.

[Image: g-HitchensThinkSelf.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2013, 01:02 AM
RE: Snowden Situation
Quote:Sorry A2 I know you dislike age being brought in but experience matters and youth limits experience.

But that's exactly it, it's not age that's important, it's the experience.

You lock a child in a white room and let him out at 51, and he will probably still act like a toddler.

It isn't the number of years that defines us, it's the things we have experienced that does.

You're right on age being a limiter to experiences, but it is NOT the issue here. Age isn't the reason he is naive or ignorant, it is experience.

Drinking Beverage

If you want a teen to act adult-like, give them the opportunity to experience adult hood. They'll become jaded and cynical.

Oh and:




Big GrinTongue

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2013, 01:05 AM
RE: Snowden Situation
(27-07-2013 11:08 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 09:44 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  Let's not forget that this kid is only a year younger (possibly less) than me.

If you want to make a big deal about his age, and criticize him for it, you need to know that I think that pointing out age is bullshit.

I don't really appreciate how some of you people point at him being young, and then using it to insult him. Mostly because I don't see age as the problem, I see lack of experience, and lack of insight and information as the key factors.

And if you say something that I feel is due to your youth, I have no issue telling you so -- and like elegant atheist, I won't hold it against you. Enjoy it, because the built in youth excuse expires with age Tongue

Youth is a shit-poor excuse. I would rather not have people think I am less than them just because I am years younger.

Nor do I like people patronizing me or giving me "an excuse."

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: