Guilty Until Proven Innocent Or The Severe Drought Of Freedom

[Shrimpbox]

This will be an interesting intellectual exercise because I will be trying to marry a conservative fundamental to a liberal gripe. A recent post about judge sotomayor worrying about our freedoms needs a footnote here too.

The other day a food service truck was making a delivery to the restuarant and I happened to look in the cab. Up where the rear view mirror should have been was was a rather elaborate camera system. I asked the driver about it and he gave me an earful. He said the camera not only looked forward but one was also sighted on the driver. That whenever he put his foot on the brake the computer saved the footage 5 seconds before and 5 seconds after the event, that he was not allowed to pick up his phone, take a drink, or eat anything while he was driving. I said that sounded a bit extreme to me. He said some drivers with 15 and 20 years experience with the company had been let go for no other reason than violating this policy. Big brother is definitely here.

One of my sons was applying for a new job as maintenance manager for an apartment complex after being let go by another apartment complex after 13 years because they felt he was making too much money for them to meet the income goals of the property. They found the most nitpicking things they could dredge up as grounds for his firing. His new prospective employers had him take a drug test, do a credit check, asked for copies of his past pay checks, and copies of his tax returns.

Finally, my son in law runs an insulation business. He has been trying to get an account with Duke Energy for rehabbing older homes for a long time. The duke energy guy shows up at the office saying their biggest concern about bringing his company on board is the many possibilities of being sued when customers see the duke energy insignia on the truck. People with previously cracked driveways will try to sue my son in laws company after they drive a truck on the pavement just because they think they have deep pockets, apparently not an uncommon fraud at all. His employees are now being trained to take pictures of everything before they even start work.

The point of these examples is twofold. One, the right of lawyers to sue now supersedes your right to privacy and two, your right to privacy is trumped by insurance companies intrusions into your life to collect the most far reaching and trivial details of your life to be used later by your employers to create the flimsiest excuses to terminate your employment all in the name of protecting oneself from being sued.

1984 is here. Our freedoms are being trampled on. Our privacy is being high jacked by accountants. How long is it going to be before not only mcdonalds but truck delivery will be done by robots. People who worry about jobs better start putting this in their pipe and start smoking it. I wouldn't last 2 weeks if I had to work for one of these companies and on my way out I would tell them to shove it up their ass. We now have a culture where you are guilty until you can prove you are innocent, that is if you even get the time, chance, and finances to prove you are innocent.

So what do we do about it. First kill all the lawyers. At a minimum have an English style system where suers accused of fraud have to pay legal fees and fines. Define and make illegal frivolous lawsuits. Pass laws where 90 percent of judgements must go to the plaintiffs and lawyers can get no more than 10 per cent of settlements. Raise the bar of proof and make injuries life threatening before one could sue. Make fraud and violations of the rules punishable with jail time. Make lawsuits the last resort not the first.

As far as privacy goes I would start here. any company that has surveillance on their workers must have the same surveillance on every one of their employees including managers, officers, the board, the president, and consultants paid by the company when they are doing company work. That would put a stop to a lot of it. Also I would promote small business which can neither afford this crap or usually doesn't need it because a lot of small business people are a more close knit family operation where common sense prevails. It may also be time to bring these privacy concerns to the courts and define exactly what a persons "private space" is.

Do I want someone driving a semi down the road and checking their Facebook page? No. But this stuff is way out of hand. Big business is in league with big govt in denying workers and individuals their rights and their privacy and their due process. Liberals who believe in workers rights and conservatives who believe in the freedoms espoused in the bill of rights need to band together and push back against those who would turn the workers of this country into a bunch of slaves.

 

[Rikurzhen]

I appreciate your well constructed essay. You raise a number of good points and I agree with much of your observation.

Where I part company with you is on the unstated cause for this turn of events. You don't delve into why this is happening and I think the why is important. The culture has changed, obviously, but what changed the culture? Culture doesn't just randomly change like this. The common links of trust that used to exist in society have now eroded. Here's the root cause:

His research shows that the more diverse a community is, the less likely its inhabitants are to trust anyone – from their next-door neighbour to the mayor. . . .

The core message of the research was that, “in the presence of diversity, we hunker down”, he said. “We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us. . . .

When the data were adjusted for class, income and other factors, they showed that the more people of different races lived in the same community, the greater the loss of trust. “They don’t trust the local mayor, they don’t trust the local paper, they don’t trust other people and they don’t trust institutions,” said Prof Putnam. “The only thing there’s more of is protest marches and TV watching.”
​

All of your complaints, they're not present in Finland or Iceland or Denmark or the Czech Republic. Strong common culture binds people together. When culture is eroded, so too is trust. People withdraw into their own cocoons.

So back to your point. I like your legal reform idea of "loser pays" but the other suggestions are like putting a band-aid on gangrenous limb. The cause of the problem needs to be addressed, not the manifestations. Turning cameras onto the Board of Directors serves no actual purpose other than to play tit for tat. It doesn't solve the underlying problem - the business owners don't share a common trust with the employees. Solve that trust problem and then the monitoring problem diminishes or goes away completely.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

This will be an interesting intellectual exercise because I will be trying to marry a conservative fundamental to a liberal gripe. A recent post about judge sotomayor worrying about our freedoms needs a footnote here too.

The other day a food service truck was making a delivery to the restuarant and I happened to look in the cab. Up where the rear view mirror should have been was was a rather elaborate camera system. I asked the driver about it and he gave me an earful. He said the camera not only looked forward but one was also sighted on the driver. That whenever he put his foot on the brake the computer saved the footage 5 seconds before and 5 seconds after the event, that he was not allowed to pick up his phone, take a drink, or eat anything while he was driving. I said that sounded a bit extreme to me. He said some drivers with 15 and 20 years experience with the company had been let go for no other reason than violating this policy. Big brother is definitely here.

One of my sons was applying for a new job as maintenance manager for an apartment complex after being let go by another apartment complex after 13 years because they felt he was making too much money for them to meet the income goals of the property. They found the most nitpicking things they could dredge up as grounds for his firing. His new prospective employers had him take a drug test, do a credit check, asked for copies of his past pay checks, and copies of his tax returns.

Finally, my son in law runs an insulation business. He has been trying to get an account with Duke Energy for rehabbing older homes for a long time. The duke energy guy shows up at the office saying their biggest concern about bringing his company on board is the many possibilities of being sued when customers see the duke energy insignia on the truck. People with previously cracked driveways will try to sue my son in laws company after they drive a truck on the pavement just because they think they have deep pockets, apparently not an uncommon fraud at all. His employees are now being trained to take pictures of everything before they even start work.

The point of these examples is twofold. One, the right of lawyers to sue now supersedes your right to privacy and two, your right to privacy is trumped by insurance companies intrusions into your life to collect the most far reaching and trivial details of your life to be used later by your employers to create the flimsiest excuses to terminate your employment all in the name of protecting oneself from being sued.

1984 is here. Our freedoms are being trampled on. Our privacy is being high jacked by accountants. How long is it going to be before not only mcdonalds but truck delivery will be done by robots. People who worry about jobs better start putting this in their pipe and start smoking it. I wouldn't last 2 weeks if I had to work for one of these companies and on my way out I would tell them to shove it up their ass. We now have a culture where you are guilty until you can prove you are innocent, that is if you even get the time, chance, and finances to prove you are innocent.

So what do we do about it. First kill all the lawyers. At a minimum have an English style system where suers accused of fraud have to pay legal fees and fines. Define and make illegal frivolous lawsuits. Pass laws where 90 percent of judgements must go to the plaintiffs and lawyers can get no more than 10 per cent of settlements. Raise the bar of proof and make injuries life threatening before one could sue. Make fraud and violations of the rules punishable with jail time. Make lawsuits the last resort not the first.

As far as privacy goes I would start here. any company that has surveillance on their workers must have the same surveillance on every one of their employees including managers, officers, the board, the president, and consultants paid by the company when they are doing company work. That would put a stop to a lot of it. Also I would promote small business which can neither afford this crap or usually doesn't need it because a lot of small business people are a more close knit family operation where common sense prevails. It may also be time to bring these privacy concerns to the courts and define exactly what a persons "private space" is.

Do I want someone driving a semi down the road and checking their Facebook page? No. But this stuff is way out of hand. Big business is in league with big govt in denying workers and individuals their rights and their privacy and their due process. Liberals who believe in workers rights and conservatives who believe in the freedoms espoused in the bill of rights need to band together and push back against those who would turn the workers of this country into a bunch of slaves.

you have no right to due process from your employer.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“I said that sounded a bit extreme to me. He said some drivers with 15 and 20 years experience with the company had been let go for no other reason than violating this policy. Big brother is definitely here.”

Incorrect.

There is no 'big brother.'

And the reference pertains only to government overreach, not the private sector where there is no expectation of privacy.

“The point of these examples is twofold. One, the right of lawyers to sue now supersedes your right to privacy and two, your right to privacy is trumped by insurance companies intrusions into your life to collect the most far reaching and trivial details of your life to be used later by your employers to create the flimsiest excuses to terminate your employment all in the name of protecting oneself from being sued.”

Also incorrect.

Again there is no 'right to privacy' in the context of the private sector.

“1984 is here. Our freedoms are being trampled on. Our privacy is being high jacked by accountants.”

Hyperbolic nonsense.

Privacy rights pertain only to placing restrictions on government, not private persons, private organizations, or private businesses.

Our freedoms are not being 'trampled on.' Indeed, Americans enjoy greater freedom today than in any time in our Nation's history, prohibiting government from violating our civil liberties.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I appreciate your well constructed essay. You raise a number of good points and I agree with much of your observation.

Where I part company with you is on the unstated cause for this turn of events. You don't delve into why this is happening and I think the why is important. The culture has changed, obviously, but what changed the culture? Culture doesn't just randomly change like this. The common links of trust that used to exist in society have now eroded. Here's the root cause:

His research shows that the more diverse a community is, the less likely its inhabitants are to trust anyone – from their next-door neighbour to the mayor. . . .

The core message of the research was that, “in the presence of diversity, we hunker down”, he said. “We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us. . . .

When the data were adjusted for class, income and other factors, they showed that the more people of different races lived in the same community, the greater the loss of trust. “They don’t trust the local mayor, they don’t trust the local paper, they don’t trust other people and they don’t trust institutions,” said Prof Putnam. “The only thing there’s more of is protest marches and TV watching.”
​

All of your complaints, they're not present in Finland or Iceland or Denmark or the Czech Republic. Strong common culture binds people together. When culture is eroded, so too is trust. People withdraw into their own cocoons.

So back to your point. I like your legal reform idea of "loser pays" but the other suggestions are like putting a band-aid on gangrenous limb. The cause of the problem needs to be addressed, not the manifestations. Turning cameras onto the Board of Directors serves no actual purpose other than to play tit for tat. It doesn't solve the underlying problem - the business owners don't share a common trust with the employees. Solve that trust problem and then the monitoring problem diminishes or goes away completely.

Wrong thread, Stormy.

The guy said to kill all the lawyers.....not all the brown people.

 

[Mad Scientist]

The Truck Driver is operating in a Commercial Capacity so I see no problem with cameras in the Cab watching him. In OUR Vehicles though? No way!

Also, your Due Process Rights don't go away when you get a job.

The solution for all this is for Americans to stop watching TV and put as much effort into understanding State and Federal Law as they do memorizing Sports Stats.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The Truck Driver is operating in a Commercial Capacity so I see no problem with cameras in the Cab watching him. In OUR Vehicles though? No way!

Also, your Due Process Rights don't go away when you get a job.

The solution for all this is for Americans to stop watching TV and put as much effort into understanding State and Federal Law as they do memorizing Sports Stats.

The solution is for Americans to educate themselves.

You do NOT have the right to due process for ANYTHING other than a criminal proceeding, and indeed the entire BofR does not apply to your employer or anyone other than the federal government.

If you work for me I can violate nearly ALL of your rights . This is why, for instance public accommodation laws are so stupid. The COTUS was never meant to apply to individuals nor businesses. Only an idiot believes otherwise.

 

[Shrimpbox]

I am not a lawyer but there is some line between between privacy and employers ability to harass you. For instance, a company cannot put cameras in the women's stalls in the bathroom even if that bathroom is on the business premises. And businesses have no "right" to demand copies of your tax records. People need to learn how to say no, granted with the possibility of not getting hired. Now if the reason for the tax forms is to see whether the company might have to take money out of your pay to send in old child support I can see a reason for that, but the company has only to ask the employee, if they lie they get fired.

Clayton please, get real. There is no big brother? so the NSA ability to spy on all your conversations is not big brother. A camera on every street corner is not big brother? Greater freedoms than anytime in our nations history? Hello! I cannot catch a fish, I cannot open a restuarant without a permit for the grease trap. Heck I can't get into the fish business without a permit. I can't pay cash for many things. I can't give a gun to my children. I cannot advocate conservative ideas on certain college campuses. I can't say a prayer before a high school athletic event. The examples are endless.

And rik I get your point to an extent. You say homogenous cultures get along better than diverse ones. That is only true though if the diverse ones do t have a set of principles that guide society. I work with Vietnamese, Mexican, Cajun, white, black, the whole nine yards in my business. We get along as long as everybody plays by the same rules. That is the problem with our society today is that we all don't play by the same rules so it is all about me getting mine, so we are divided. The smaller the social network the more the trust. Our diversity is not the problem.

And to go back to the trust issue, big companies have lost the connection to their workers, they see a spread sheet not human beings which is why I say accountants are determining our privacy parameters.

 

[whitehall]

It's a litigating society. The ironic thing is that videos often raise more questions than they answer. Orwell was a few years off the timetable but he was pretty close. Someday the Supreme Court might address privacy issues but for now you can assume that you are under surveillance at all times and act accordingly.

 

[Rikurzhen]

And rik I get your point to an extent. You say homogenous cultures get along better than diverse ones. That is only true though if the diverse ones do t have a set of principles that guide society. I work with Vietnamese, Mexican, Cajun, white, black, the whole nine yards in my business. We get along as long as everybody plays by the same rules. That is the problem with our society today is that we all don't play by the same rules so it is all about me getting mine, so we are divided. The smaller the social network the more the trust. Our diversity is not the problem.

And to go back to the trust issue, big companies have lost the connection to their workers, they see a spread sheet not human beings which is why I say accountants are determining our privacy parameters.

The same rules set by whom? In the company it's the boss who sets the rules, in society all of those coworkers have an equal say in shaping society. The evolved social values then blow back onto the company. All of a sudden the company has to set aside a prayer room for Muslims, it has to allow a Sikh to wear a turban and remain unshaven while still mandating that men wear a delivery cap and be shaved when representing the company. All of this eats away at trust. Diversity is the cancer at the root of this problem, it's been known from the dawn of humanity that if one can divide an opponent's group then conquering the group becomes easier. Division and diversity lead to being conquered.

 

[Esmeralda]

whenever he put his foot on the brake the computer saved the footage 5 seconds before and 5 seconds after the event, that he was not allowed to pick up his phone, take a drink, or eat anything while he was driving.

These are safety hazards, and the company is correct is trying to stop such behavior.

The point of these examples is twofold. One, the right of lawyers to sue now supersedes your right to privacy and two, your right to privacy is trumped by insurance companies intrusions into your life to collect the most far reaching and trivial details of your life to be used later by your employers to create the flimsiest excuses to terminate your employment all in the name of protecting oneself from being sued.

I always find it odd that people get so PO’d about their right to privacy. If you are not doing anything wrong, so what? What’s to worry about? I am essentially a very private person, but I do not resent this kind of thing because most likely no one is going to look at it closely or make a big deal about it because there won’t be a reason to. It’s like all bureaucracy, piles and piles of information most likely no one ever looks at. These formal documents about me are not ‘me,’ and people looking at them don’t make me feel paranoid. It’s not like it is going to be published in the NY Times, unless I commit a murder or something.

Last year, I asked to see something in my personnel file and make copies. The company had no problem with it and didn't even remember those papers. The point is, they looked at this stuff when they first hired me, filed it and forgot about it. My continuing employment is based on my job performance and nothing else. This is typical of most companies.

As well, if they want to fire someone, they will find a reason, they don't necessarily need to go to papers filed in their personnel file to find a reason: reasons for firing people are easy to come by without that.

1984 is NOT HERE. If you think that, you are not familiar with the book.

And your solution? Kill people and make the justice system worse than your perception of the loss of privacy. Good critical thinking skills there.

 

[Mertex]

I am not a lawyer but there is some line between between privacy and employers ability to harass you. For instance, a company cannot put cameras in the women's stalls in the bathroom even if that bathroom is on the business premises. And businesses have no "right" to demand copies of your tax records. People need to learn how to say no, granted with the possibility of not getting hired. Now if the reason for the tax forms is to see whether the company might have to take money out of your pay to send in old child support I can see a reason for that, but the company has only to ask the employee, if they lie they get fired.

Clayton please, get real. There is no big brother? so the NSA ability to spy on all your conversations is not big brother. A camera on every street corner is not big brother? Greater freedoms than anytime in our nations history? Hello! I cannot catch a fish, I cannot open a restuarant without a permit for the grease trap. Heck I can't get into the fish business without a permit. I can't pay cash for many things. I can't give a gun to my children. I cannot advocate conservative ideas on certain college campuses. I can't say a prayer before a high school athletic event. The examples are endless.

And rik I get your point to an extent. You say homogenous cultures get along better than diverse ones. That is only true though if the diverse ones do t have a set of principles that guide society. I work with Vietnamese, Mexican, Cajun, white, black, the whole nine yards in my business. We get along as long as everybody plays by the same rules. That is the problem with our society today is that we all don't play by the same rules so it is all about me getting mine, so we are divided. The smaller the social network the more the trust. Our diversity is not the problem.

And to go back to the trust issue, big companies have lost the connection to their workers, they see a spread sheet not human beings which is why I say accountants are determining our privacy parameters.

In many cases, the cameras on every street corner have helped to solve crimes that probably would have never been solved. The cameras in school buses protect the driver as well as the students. There have been cases where drivers are texting and driving and have caused accidents. Certainly the camera is of help in this case. Other times, the students on a bus have bullied and beat up a student, without the camera it would be hard to prove that the bullies were indeed committing a crime, and probably would go unpunished. And, the NSA is not spying on all our conversations. People spreading misinformation just begets fear. We already have enough media sources promoting fear where there is none to be had. The NSA, while they may be tracking every conversation, will likely not be listening to millions and millions of conversations just to pass the time, but if there were reason for them to do so (like they did in the Boston marathon snipers), they are able to find connections that help them solve crimes.

We live in very progressive times, technology is available and will be used accordingly. What I don't understand is why you would want to give a gun to your children. Are you living in such a fearful neighborhood/town/state that you feel you need to arm your children? I suppose that you support the parents who provided shooting lessons to their 9 year old, to learn how to shoot an Uzi and ended up killing the instructor? That child will have that seared into her mind forever....what a wonderful gift from the parents, don't you think?

As for not being able to say a prayer before a high school athletic event, that is pure BS. I can pray any time of night or day and nobody can stop me. What you are wanting is for everyone to acquiesce to your beliefs and allow you to pray a Christian prayer. Would you feel obligated to allow a Muslim, a Buddhist or any other religion to be allowed to do the same? Of course not. I'm a Christian, but as a Christian I also believe that we have to be fair. Fair to everyone in the United States that pays taxes and not push my beliefs on others whether they like it or not. That is something that some conservative Christians are having a difficult time accepting.

While some aspects of what you have said may be true, I think you are exaggerating far beyond what really is.

 

[Esmeralda]

I am not a lawyer but there is some line between between privacy and employers ability to harass you. For instance, a company cannot put cameras in the women's stalls in the bathroom even if that bathroom is on the business premises. And businesses have no "right" to demand copies of your tax records. People need to learn how to say no, granted with the possibility of not getting hired. Now if the reason for the tax forms is to see whether the company might have to take money out of your pay to send in old child support I can see a reason for that, but the company has only to ask the employee, if they lie they get fired.

Clayton please, get real. There is no big brother? so the NSA ability to spy on all your conversations is not big brother. A camera on every street corner is not big brother? Greater freedoms than anytime in our nations history? Hello! I cannot catch a fish, I cannot open a restuarant without a permit for the grease trap. Heck I can't get into the fish business without a permit. I can't pay cash for many things. I can't give a gun to my children. I cannot advocate conservative ideas on certain college campuses. I can't say a prayer before a high school athletic event. The examples are endless.

And rik I get your point to an extent. You say homogenous cultures get along better than diverse ones. That is only true though if the diverse ones do t have a set of principles that guide society. I work with Vietnamese, Mexican, Cajun, white, black, the whole nine yards in my business. We get along as long as everybody plays by the same rules. That is the problem with our society today is that we all don't play by the same rules so it is all about me getting mine, so we are divided. The smaller the social network the more the trust. Our diversity is not the problem.

And to go back to the trust issue, big companies have lost the connection to their workers, they see a spread sheet not human beings which is why I say accountants are determining our privacy parameters.

In many cases, the cameras on every street corner have helped to solve crimes that probably would have never been solved. The cameras in school buses protect the driver as well as the students. There have been cases where drivers are texting and driving and have caused accidents. Certainly the camera is of help in this case. Other times, the students on a bus have bullied and beat up a student, without the camera it would be hard to prove that the bullies were indeed committing a crime, and probably would go unpunished. And, the NSA is not spying on all our conversations. People spreading misinformation just begets fear. We already have enough media sources promoting fear where there is none to be had. The NSA, while they may be tracking every conversation, will likely not be listening to millions and millions of conversations just to pass the time, but if there were reason for them to do so (like they did in the Boston marathon snipers), they are able to find connections that help them solve crimes.

We live in very progressive times, technology is available and will be used accordingly. What I don't understand is why you would want to give a gun to your children. Are you living in such a fearful neighborhood/town/state that you feel you need to arm your children? I suppose that you support the parents who provided shooting lessons to their 9 year old, to learn how to shoot an Uzi and ended up killing the instructor? That child will have that seared into her mind forever....what a wonderful gift from the parents, don't you think?

As for not being able to say a prayer before a high school athletic event, that is pure BS. I can pray any time of night or day and nobody can stop me. What you are wanting is for everyone to acquiesce to your beliefs and allow you to pray a Christian prayer. Would you feel obligated to allow a Muslim, a Buddhist or any other religion to be allowed to do the same? Of course not. I'm a Christian, but as a Christian I also believe that we have to be fair. Fair to everyone in the United States that pays taxes and not push my beliefs on others whether they like it or not. That is something that some conservative Christians are having a difficult time accepting.

While some aspects of what you have said may be true, I think you are exaggerating far beyond what really is.

 

[Rikurzhen]

The NSA, while they may be tracking every conversation, will likely not be listening to millions and millions of conversations just to pass the time, but if there were reason for them to do so (like they did in the Boston marathon snipers), they are able to find connections that help them solve crimes.

Is it OK for the NSA to record you having sex or going to the bathroom so long as they promise not to look at the video recordings unless you become a suspect in a crime?

What I don't understand is why you would want to give a gun to your children. Are you living in such a fearful neighborhood/town/state that you feel you need to arm your children? I suppose that you support the parents who provided shooting lessons to their 9 year old, to learn how to shoot an Uzi and ended up killing the instructor? That child will have that seared into her mind forever....what a wonderful gift from the parents, don't you think?

For what it's worth, as soon as I read your first sentence I knew you would go to the 9 year old girl example. What exactly do you think is learned from a rare outlier incident like that? If a girl chokes on a carrot stick do you similarly ban carrot sticks from the dinner table? Do you similarly chastise parents for serving carrot sticks to their kids?

Fair to everyone in the United States that pays taxes and not push my beliefs on others whether they like it or not. That is something that some conservative Christians are having a difficult time accepting.

Bullpucky. The Religion of Liberalism jams its beliefs down my throat every single day. There's a baker who had to serve homosexuals against her will and had to do so because liberalism was jammed down their throat.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“Clayton please, get real. There is no big brother? so the NSA ability to spy on all your conversations is not big brother. A camera on every street corner is not big brother?”


No, it's not – there is no such thing as 'big brother,' it's hyperbolic demagoguery and fear-mongering nonsense.


Cite where the Supreme Court ruled the NSA programs or street corner cameras are un-Constitutional.


The right to privacy and restrictions on government pertaining to privacy rights are predicated on the doctrine of a reasonable expectation of privacy, where no such reasonable expectation exists when voluntarily providing information to a private third party such as a wireless phone company or walking down a public street.


The Constitution and its case law is what's real, what constitutes a violation of the 4th Amendment as determined by the Federal courts is what real, not your subjective, errant perception of the myth of 'big brother.'


“Greater freedoms than anytime in our nations history?”


Correct.


More Americans enjoy greater freedom today than at any time in our Nation's history, and that freedom is more secure today than at any time in our Nation's history. For example, African-Americans are afforded and guaranteed the fundamental right to vote, women are afforded and guaranteed the fundamental right to privacy, and soon gay Americans will realize their comprehensive civil liberties.


Last, the mistake you make is to incorrectly perceive 'the government' and the people as two separate, distinct entities – when in fact nothing could be further from the truth, as they are one in the same. The NSA programs exist at the behest of the American people, cameras on street corners exist at the behest of the people, just as the people instructed their elected representatives in Congress and their elected representatives in local communities to do. And because 'the government' and the people are one in the same, it's incumbent upon the people to end that which they perceive to be in violation of their privacy – and failing to do so, the people alone are responsible for any rights lost, or privacy violated, not 'the government.'

 

[LoneLaugher]

I am not a lawyer but there is some line between between privacy and employers ability to harass you. For instance, a company cannot put cameras in the women's stalls in the bathroom even if that bathroom is on the business premises. And businesses have no "right" to demand copies of your tax records. People need to learn how to say no, granted with the possibility of not getting hired. Now if the reason for the tax forms is to see whether the company might have to take money out of your pay to send in old child support I can see a reason for that, but the company has only to ask the employee, if they lie they get fired.

Clayton please, get real. There is no big brother? so the NSA ability to spy on all your conversations is not big brother. A camera on every street corner is not big brother? Greater freedoms than anytime in our nations history? Hello! I cannot catch a fish, I cannot open a restuarant without a permit for the grease trap. Heck I can't get into the fish business without a permit. I can't pay cash for many things. I can't give a gun to my children. I cannot advocate conservative ideas on certain college campuses. I can't say a prayer before a high school athletic event. The examples are endless.

And rik I get your point to an extent. You say homogenous cultures get along better than diverse ones. That is only true though if the diverse ones do t have a set of principles that guide society. I work with Vietnamese, Mexican, Cajun, white, black, the whole nine yards in my business. We get along as long as everybody plays by the same rules. That is the problem with our society today is that we all don't play by the same rules so it is all about me getting mine, so we are divided. The smaller the social network the more the trust. Our diversity is not the problem.

And to go back to the trust issue, big companies have lost the connection to their workers, they see a spread sheet not human beings which is why I say accountants are determining our privacy parameters.

In many cases, the cameras on every street corner have helped to solve crimes that probably would have never been solved. The cameras in school buses protect the driver as well as the students. There have been cases where drivers are texting and driving and have caused accidents. Certainly the camera is of help in this case. Other times, the students on a bus have bullied and beat up a student, without the camera it would be hard to prove that the bullies were indeed committing a crime, and probably would go unpunished. And, the NSA is not spying on all our conversations. People spreading misinformation just begets fear. We already have enough media sources promoting fear where there is none to be had. The NSA, while they may be tracking every conversation, will likely not be listening to millions and millions of conversations just to pass the time, but if there were reason for them to do so (like they did in the Boston marathon snipers), they are able to find connections that help them solve crimes.

We live in very progressive times, technology is available and will be used accordingly. What I don't understand is why you would want to give a gun to your children. Are you living in such a fearful neighborhood/town/state that you feel you need to arm your children? I suppose that you support the parents who provided shooting lessons to their 9 year old, to learn how to shoot an Uzi and ended up killing the instructor? That child will have that seared into her mind forever....what a wonderful gift from the parents, don't you think?

As for not being able to say a prayer before a high school athletic event, that is pure BS. I can pray any time of night or day and nobody can stop me. What you are wanting is for everyone to acquiesce to your beliefs and allow you to pray a Christian prayer. Would you feel obligated to allow a Muslim, a Buddhist or any other religion to be allowed to do the same? Of course not. I'm a Christian, but as a Christian I also believe that we have to be fair. Fair to everyone in the United States that pays taxes and not push my beliefs on others whether they like it or not. That is something that some conservative Christians are having a difficult time accepting.

While some aspects of what you have said may be true, I think you are exaggerating far beyond what really is.

There were prayer circles at just about ever HS sporting event that my kids were involved in.

 

[sameech]

In my state, employers do not need a reason to fire you unless you are under contract. The only time they need a reason is if they want to fight your getting unemployment (which keeps their unemployment insurance costs lower).

 

[Shrimpbox]

Ok I don't have enough time to respond to all the posts so let me work on Mertex.

I am not against cameras on school buses. Technology is a two edged sword, good and bad, and there is a whole lot of gray area. But...........

NSA is different. If you don't think NSA will be used at some point to affect a national election, you are naive. All you need is a critical senate race to swing the senate one way or the other and an over zealous appointee will make some very sensitive info available to the political committee to be used to blackmail someone. Don't think it could happen, right like the irs could never be used as a political weapon. And the potential to high jack our whole political system with personal,information in the wrong hands is more likely than possible. And the great thing for the perpetrators here is that no one would ever know, cause no one knows now.

Ah yes guns, I think now you are trying to get me where you want me to be. You know I find some people that want to ban guns to be more bloodthirsty than those that own guns. There is not one sane gun owner that believes a nine year old needs to be handling an Uzi, so you and most gun owners are in agreement. As far as handing guns down, I guess you think all of us guns owners are paranoid seal team wannabes.(you want this image to be coupled with the conservative Christian bit that comes latter along with implied tea party kook bit to totally discredit). How about if I wanted to pass along a pistol my grandfather used on the beaches of Normandy as a momento of our family. I don't worry about arming my children M because if our freedoms remain intact and my children decide they want to own a firearm they can go get one themselves.

The prayer deal shows an area of greatest division between liberals and conservatives. This country was founded on judeo Christian beliefs. That's what this country is about. It is our tradition and our identity. Tolerance of other religions is a by product of this not a point that diminishes our original Christian foundations. So a Christian prayer at a football game is not a negation of other religions, as it would be if we were in a Muslim country, but a affirmation of American culture and tradition. Let's celebrate the Muslim, Buddhist , and atheist prayer circles at the football games right after we say our prayer, but let's stop laying a guilt trip on Americana in the name of what Americana is about.

M did you ever get my check?

 

[Mertex]

The NSA, while they may be tracking every conversation, will likely not be listening to millions and millions of conversations just to pass the time, but if there were reason for them to do so (like they did in the Boston marathon snipers), they are able to find connections that help them solve crimes.

Is it OK for the NSA to record you having sex or going to the bathroom so long as they promise not to look at the video recordings unless you become a suspect in a crime?

If you equate conversations on the phone to going to the bathroom or having sex, it is no wonder you are so fearful.

For what it's worth, as soon as I read your first sentence I knew you would go to the 9 year old girl example. What exactly do you think is learned from a rare outlier incident like that? If a girl chokes on a carrot stick do you similarly ban carrot sticks from the dinner table? Do you similarly chastise parents for serving carrot sticks to their kids?

Really. You are comparing carrots to an Uzi? Carrots are not weapons made to kill, guns are. If you can give me one worthy example why a 9 year old should be trained in how to shoot an Uzi, (in the US) you might have a good argument, otherwise you are comparing apples and oranges and not worthy of even bothering with any of your responses.

Bullpucky. The Religion of Liberalism jams its beliefs down my throat every single day. There's a baker who had to serve homosexuals against her will and had to do so because liberalism was jammed down their throat.

Bullpucky......you just don't understand how the law works, so it's probably a waste of time trying to explain it to you. But nobody jams anything down your throat. If you have a business that utilizes public sidewalks, roads, etc., you are expected to serve the public. That is the law. If these people are so uptight that they think baking a cake for a homosexual is somehow going to taint them or make them become a homosexual, then they don't need to be in a business that serves the public. They are not forced to be homosexuals or to practice it, so your assessment is not only incorrect, it is obtuse.

 

[Mertex]

I am not a lawyer but there is some line between between privacy and employers ability to harass you. For instance, a company cannot put cameras in the women's stalls in the bathroom even if that bathroom is on the business premises. And businesses have no "right" to demand copies of your tax records. People need to learn how to say no, granted with the possibility of not getting hired. Now if the reason for the tax forms is to see whether the company might have to take money out of your pay to send in old child support I can see a reason for that, but the company has only to ask the employee, if they lie they get fired.

Clayton please, get real. There is no big brother? so the NSA ability to spy on all your conversations is not big brother. A camera on every street corner is not big brother? Greater freedoms than anytime in our nations history? Hello! I cannot catch a fish, I cannot open a restuarant without a permit for the grease trap. Heck I can't get into the fish business without a permit. I can't pay cash for many things. I can't give a gun to my children. I cannot advocate conservative ideas on certain college campuses. I can't say a prayer before a high school athletic event. The examples are endless.

And rik I get your point to an extent. You say homogenous cultures get along better than diverse ones. That is only true though if the diverse ones do t have a set of principles that guide society. I work with Vietnamese, Mexican, Cajun, white, black, the whole nine yards in my business. We get along as long as everybody plays by the same rules. That is the problem with our society today is that we all don't play by the same rules so it is all about me getting mine, so we are divided. The smaller the social network the more the trust. Our diversity is not the problem.

And to go back to the trust issue, big companies have lost the connection to their workers, they see a spread sheet not human beings which is why I say accountants are determining our privacy parameters.

In many cases, the cameras on every street corner have helped to solve crimes that probably would have never been solved. The cameras in school buses protect the driver as well as the students. There have been cases where drivers are texting and driving and have caused accidents. Certainly the camera is of help in this case. Other times, the students on a bus have bullied and beat up a student, without the camera it would be hard to prove that the bullies were indeed committing a crime, and probably would go unpunished. And, the NSA is not spying on all our conversations. People spreading misinformation just begets fear. We already have enough media sources promoting fear where there is none to be had. The NSA, while they may be tracking every conversation, will likely not be listening to millions and millions of conversations just to pass the time, but if there were reason for them to do so (like they did in the Boston marathon snipers), they are able to find connections that help them solve crimes.

We live in very progressive times, technology is available and will be used accordingly. What I don't understand is why you would want to give a gun to your children. Are you living in such a fearful neighborhood/town/state that you feel you need to arm your children? I suppose that you support the parents who provided shooting lessons to their 9 year old, to learn how to shoot an Uzi and ended up killing the instructor? That child will have that seared into her mind forever....what a wonderful gift from the parents, don't you think?

As for not being able to say a prayer before a high school athletic event, that is pure BS. I can pray any time of night or day and nobody can stop me. What you are wanting is for everyone to acquiesce to your beliefs and allow you to pray a Christian prayer. Would you feel obligated to allow a Muslim, a Buddhist or any other religion to be allowed to do the same? Of course not. I'm a Christian, but as a Christian I also believe that we have to be fair. Fair to everyone in the United States that pays taxes and not push my beliefs on others whether they like it or not. That is something that some conservative Christians are having a difficult time accepting.

While some aspects of what you have said may be true, I think you are exaggerating far beyond what really is.

There were prayer circles at just about ever HS sporting event that my kids were involved in.

Exactly.....I could pray at the beginning of a football game, in the middle, or the end of the game.....and nobody has ever tried to stop me. I don't need for everyone to stop doing what they are doing and be quiet, and close their eyes, while I hold my head down and pray.........that right has never been taken from me. Why some keep insisting that they can't pray in school or athletic events is pure BS.