http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/

Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

What are the chances something like this passes? It's unbelievable to amount of access the government thinks they deserve in our personal lives. If this doesn't frighten and/or piss you off you're doing it wrong.

I get your point, I do. That said, I have nothing in any of my communications that would be of interest to the govt.

Alternatively, maybe Obama could read some of my postings and fucking learn something

gut;1325955 wrote:I get your point, I do. That said, I have nothing in any of my communications that would be of interest to the govt.

Alternatively, maybe Obama could read some of my postings and fucking learn something

I don't have anything to hide either. But like you said, that's not my point. The point is the government has no fucking right to access our accounts.

justincredible;1325959 wrote:The point is the government has no fucking right to access our accounts.

This x 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

justincredible;1325959 wrote:I don't have anything to hide either. But like you said, that's not my point. The point is the government has no ****ing right to access our accounts.

I agree, but with the speed of technology and electronic communications, you have to consider the efficiency and effectiveness of counter terrorism efforts. OK, so you get a warrant for [email][email protected][/email] what about when that guy creates joebob2? So you go to judges rubber-stamping these warrants as fast an the FBI can type - what's the real difference other than to give more time and protection to criminals?

I think I would be satisfied for strong language to be written that any evidence/communications received before just cause is established are inadmissible in court.

What I'm saying is if the FBI had reason to read my emails, I'm under no illusions they couldn't easily get a warrant allowing them to do so.

Just wow.

gut;1325973 wrote:What I'm saying is if the FBI had reason to read my emails, I'm under no illusions they couldn't easily get a warrant allowing them to do so.

I at least want them to have to get a warrant so there is some level of checks and balances.

WebFire;1326008 wrote:

Closer and closer every day. It doesn't even matter which party you vote for.

FatHobbit;1326001 wrote:I at least want them to have to get a warrant so there is some level of checks and balances.

That's why I would favor a law that says any info is inadmissible without independent justification for a warrant (i.e. they can't use info from the emails to build a case for the warrant).

You have to balance their ability to surveil terrorists with the interests of private, law-abiding citizens. But as usual not a lot of concern in Washington for the latter (dollars to donuts there is an exception for political figures, i.e. the Petreus amendment).

gut;1326045 wrote:That's why I would favor a law that says any info is inadmissible without independent justification for a warrant (i.e. they can't use info from the emails to build a case for the warrant).

I don't want them poking around without a warrant. What I have in my email is none of their business unless they can prove the need first.

gut;1326045 wrote: You have to balance their ability to surveil terrorists with the interests of private, law-abiding citizens. But as usual not a lot of concern in Washington for the latter (dollars to donuts there is an exception for political figures, i.e. the Petreus amendment).

We have a document that's supposed to act as a guide as to how to strike that balance. It's unfortunate it's being ignored (or as some say a "living document" which is code for "it means what we want it to mean").

queencitybuckeye;1326065 wrote:We have a document that's supposed to act as a guide as to how to strike that balance. It's unfortunate it's being ignored (or as some say a "living document" which is code for "it means what we want it to mean").

That document never anticipated the speed some of this stuff would eventually move. Written when it was a two-day horse ride to the next town. You had plenty of time to get a warrant, then.

Like I said, I'm under absolutely no illusion the FBI can't get a warrant if they want my emails.

gut;1326069 wrote:That document never anticipated the speed some of this stuff would eventually move. Written when it was a two-day horse ride to the next town. You had plenty of time to get a warrant, then.

Then the document should be changed, not ignored.

Like I said, I'm under absolutely no illusion the FBI can't get a warrant if they want my emails.

Then your first point is incorrect.

I don't understand the attitude that I have nothing to hide so why should I worry? That is just fucking amazing, that people are that unconcernced about the powers that the government are grabbing. Wow, just fucking wow. How brainwashed are people that we have a lot of people who have the same attitude as gut?

Are you so scared of terrorism, has the media done such a good job convincing you that everyone is out to get this country, that you are willing to let the government do whatever it wants? Does the 4th Amendment mean absolutely nothing now?

tk421;1326081 wrote:How brainwashed are people that we have a lot of people who have the same attitude as gut?

Not brainwashed at all. I feel a bigger threat to my liberty is the FBI waiting hours or days to get a warrant on a suspected terrorist. I mean, what, I want to pay more money for the FBI to go the long-route to protect something that isn't all that secure or private in the first place, and that isn't particularly valuable to me?

It cracks me up to see all the conspiracy theorists and doomsdayers get fired up every month over a new bill when they voluntary open their kimono to the world daily on the internet.

Just like all the BS over TSA screening and the like "bwahamm grumble this is bullshit and I don't want to wait for hours in line". Going thru the airport has never been smoother.

And all the anti-govt types and libertarian get their panties in a bunch over the slightest thing. Put on your thinking cap and realize this isn't a big deal and being blown way out of proportion. "Ohhh, well, ohhhhh I don't have anything to hide but I don't want to govt to go looking at people who do because that will infringe on my rights".

If the govt wants to do bad things, they're going to do it. This doesn't stop them. The naive irrationality that people show sometimes, clinging to something that doesn't really exist in the first place.

lol, ok. So, since the government can already do bad things, we should just take the 4th amendment outside and light it on fire right? According to you there is no reason to ever get upset about Congress passing these types of bills. It's all in the name of safety, correct? Anything to feel safe.

If you think the FBI is waiting days after the Patriot Act to get a warrant on a suspected "terrorist" and that they need this bill to do their job, I've got a bridge in Alaska to sell you. This is nothing but a power grab, origianally the bill was going to protect our data but law enforcement complained and of course they caved and changed it.

gut;1326091 wrote: Just like all the BS over TSA screening and the like "bwahamm grumble this is bullshit and I don't want to wait for hours in line". Going thru the airport has never been smoother.

I daresay I've been traveling by air longer than the majority of posters here have been alive, and this is a flat out falsehood. You're better than this, did footwedge hijack your account?

queencitybuckeye;1326104 wrote:I daresay I've been traveling by air longer than the majority of posters here have been alive, and this is a flat out falsehood. You're better than this, did footwedge hijack your account?

I travel quite a bit (domestically). Maybe it's because I don't usually hit peak times, but most of the time I walk thru security. It doesn't get any better than that. Of the dozen-plus major metro airports I've been the past few years only DEN was bad. And, well, coming back from Toronto was brutal.

Those who give up liberty for security deserve neither!

justincredible;1325959 wrote:I don't have anything to hide either. But like you said, that's not my point. The point is the government has no ****ing right to access our accounts.

You're right and the government knows it. That's why this legislation exists. If it passes the government will definitely have a right to access our accounts.

Cough, as usual, most claims to oh my god the Government is reading my emails talk is false, that was one of the previous versions and was changed.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/11/20/report-claiming-senator-leahy-is-about-to-make-email-privacy-even-worse-is-flawed/

And besides, does anyone really think this would have a chance of passing?
If anyone has been paying attention to the latest Cyber Security Bill (I doubt it on here), you know that the Senate killed it because of concerns it will hurt industry.
Now, suddenly, they will vote for a bill that completes ignores industry? Riiiight.

Keep the fear alive.

ptown_trojans_1;1326424 wrote:Cough, as usual, most claims to oh my god the Government is reading my emails talk is false, that was one of the previous versions and was changed.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/11/20/report-claiming-senator-leahy-is-about-to-make-email-privacy-even-worse-is-flawed/

And besides, does anyone really think this would have a chance of passing?
If anyone has been paying attention to the latest Cyber Security Bill (I doubt it on here), you know that the Senate killed it because of concerns it will hurt industry.
Now, suddenly, they will vote for a bill that completes ignores industry? Riiiight.

Keep the fear alive.

Okay.