Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 30, 2014, 01:10:06 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Discussion
| |-+  Constitution and Law (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | |-+  Right to Privacy
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Poll
Question: Is a generic right to privacy included in the US Constitution?
Yes (D)   -16 (38.1%)
No (D)   -5 (11.9%)
Yes (R)   -2 (4.8%)
No (R)   -11 (26.2%)
Yes (Other)   -4 (9.5%)
No (Other)   -4 (9.5%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 42

Author Topic: Right to Privacy  (Read 5709 times)
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16062


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: May 29, 2009, 06:27:49 pm »
Ignore

As interpreted by American constitutional law, yes, just as many other aspects of American constitutional law contribute to the application of the constitution.

You can argue over whether the development of legal precedent and scholarship imprints upon the constitution itself or not; but the actual law that governs the country, and which has for most of its history, is far more complex than could be embodied only in the words of the original document itself. I'm sorry of this explanation does not fit on a bumper sticker.
Logged

Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35790
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: May 31, 2009, 06:34:30 pm »
Ignore

Not really.  Obviously the government can't perform unreasonable searches or seizures.

Beyond that, though, there's no Constitutional guarantee to privacy.

And the "right to privacy" has been taken to such an extreme - when people complain that being videotaped in PUBLIC is a violation of their privacy rights, we have abused civil liberties a bit too much.
Logged
Judäischen Volksfront
exnaderite
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5489


Political Matrix
E: -3.29, S: -8.26

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: June 01, 2009, 12:24:05 am »
Ignore

In the 18th century, the only possible way to convey information was by writing it on paper. It is impossible for them to write any document while thinking of technological progress for the next 200 + years. Therefore it can be reasonably argued that the US Constitution as it stands protects against the government arbitrarily looking into the personal domain, like electronic documents, biological data, etc.

In the same vein, the First Amendment specifically protects "the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble". Due to the progress in technology, it is accepted that Radio, TV, Internet are protected even when they are not specifically mentioned on paper.
Logged

Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35790
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: June 01, 2009, 09:44:43 pm »
Ignore

In the 18th century, the only possible way to convey information was by writing it on paper. It is impossible for them to write any document while thinking of technological progress for the next 200 + years. Therefore it can be reasonably argued that the US Constitution as it stands protects against the government arbitrarily looking into the personal domain, like electronic documents, biological data, etc.

In the same vein, the First Amendment specifically protects "the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble". Due to the progress in technology, it is accepted that Radio, TV, Internet are protected even when they are not specifically mentioned on paper.

But how specifically does that translate to right to privacy?
Logged
Earth
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2554


Political Matrix
E: -9.61, S: -9.83

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: June 01, 2009, 11:43:28 pm »
Ignore

Due to the progress in technology, it is accepted that Radio, TV, Internet are protected even when they are not specifically mentioned on paper.

The only possible way for the legal system to set up something that covers current and future technologies from intrusion into citizen's personal lives are obviously rulings, not the constitution. It's after the fact, and many don't go far enough.

Unless it's specifically defined by the courts, it's par for the course. It's an erroneous assumption to believe anything you write or speak over the internet or phone stays between you and the directed party. I'm reminded of operation Echelon, corporate data mining, profile deletion on social networking sites (and personal materials being owned by the company), and employers firing their workers based on comments or activity off work time.
Logged

Wealth comes mostly from two sources in Western countries - either being very good at something people are willing to pay for or by working hard at becoming wealthy...
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines