| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| "It's an emergency, you have no right to privacy" | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 4 2009, 04:18 AM (203 Views) | |
| George K | Apr 4 2009, 04:18 AM Post #1 |
|
Finally
|
Should Obama Control the Internet? Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency? Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians. The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president. The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Apr 4 2009, 05:29 AM Post #2 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
Ugh. No. The right to free speech isn't a right only during non-emergency conditions. And the Constitutional rights to privacy and against unreasonable search and seizure cannot be amended by legislation. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Frank_W | Apr 4 2009, 06:07 AM Post #3 |
![]()
Resident Misanthrope
|
WHAT??? Man, and people on the internet screamed about W being a fascist... Holy crap. |
|
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin." Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!" | |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Apr 4 2009, 06:08 AM Post #4 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
Absolutely not. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| blondie | Apr 4 2009, 06:12 AM Post #5 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
Stupido. |
![]() |
|
| Mark | Apr 4 2009, 07:32 AM Post #6 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
This is a direct result of more than 100 years of federal government power grab. The left wants more power for socialist programs, the right wants more power to well, I'm really not sure about the right anymore, blah blah blah. The people voted for this large intrusive and all powerful government. Each side capitalized on the other's power grabs and step by step we have received exactly what we "wanted". Now both sides clamor for constitutionality. But, it may be too late. We seem to have lost what so many sacrificed to give us. |
|
___.___ (_]===* o 0 When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Apr 4 2009, 11:22 AM Post #7 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I agree (partially). Obviously the rights can be amended by legislation since all it takes is a constitutional amendment to take away those rights. While a rightly cumbersome process, that is the problem of a legal positivist system. You have no inherent rights, only those the State grants you. So what they give, they can take away. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Apr 4 2009, 12:02 PM Post #8 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
There's a distinction between a Constitutional amendment and legislation. Amendments to the Constitution are not typically referred to as legislation ... for one thing, they cannot be enacted by legislators. Yes, the rights can be taken away by Constitutional amendment. I speak of the rights to privacy and against unreasonable search and seizure as they currently exist, not as they might be after being changed by a Constitutional amendment. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Apr 4 2009, 01:57 PM Post #9 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I understand your distinctions. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |








4:37 PM Jul 10