| Welcome to Fusion. 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 are registering with a Yahoo e-mail address, or if you are having trouble receiving your validation e-mail, please refer to this topic for assistance. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Wait a minute.... | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 3 2006, 06:39 PM (2,256 Views) | |
| Reaver | Jan 19 2006, 07:42 PM Post #121 |
|
Troll
![]()
|
They tap to phone to "search" for proof that the suspect is a terrorist.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 19 2006, 07:49 PM Post #122 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
How the hell is listening in on a converstation "searching"? |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| Brazy CK | Jan 19 2006, 08:04 PM Post #123 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
...They are searching for terrorist threats by listening to conversations. It's the same as searching a house, except now they don't need a warrant, and it's via the phone. |
![]() |
|
| Reaver | Jan 19 2006, 08:06 PM Post #124 |
|
Troll
![]()
|
If you're searching for information, you ask somone to see if they can tell you waht to wish to know. If you tap a suspect's phone, you listen to see if they can tell you what you're searching for. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 19 2006, 08:16 PM Post #125 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
Yeah, but your not searching anything by tapping the phones. Your listening. |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| Reaver | Jan 19 2006, 08:32 PM Post #126 |
|
Troll
![]()
|
Why are you listening? To find out information. How do you find something. Search for it.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Wind Sword | Jan 19 2006, 09:36 PM Post #127 |
|
SKILLNADEN ÄR DRINKABILITY
![]()
|
Okay, before I thought we had settled it was about search warrants, now we're trying to group wiretaps into search warrants. It's a stretch. A big one. Note their the word effects means only their property anywho. You took one word from an unrelated admendment that is so vague, it could mean anything. Are they "Searching" for information. In a way. It's more like fishing. They don't know what they could find. Note how all the items aforementioned in the amendment were concrete, solid objects, rather than "Searching for information" could mean anything. By your interpretation, tape recorders, looking in a window, asking someone something, knocking on a guy's door, taking fingerprints, forensics, and subpeonas all warrant warrants. In other words, police have to go to a judge and say, we need your permission to basically even investigate this crime. Information is nothing you have monopoly, and should you accidently disclose it when you think Big Brother isn't listening, umm who cares? My entire arguement goes back to the fact that even if a law/amendment was in action, it should be repealed. My point of view is nothing horrible can come from wiretapping the wrong guy, EVERYTHING can come from tapping a thug. |
~~Wind Sword
Touching. Scientology
Smartest post ever made. | |
![]() |
|
| Crysta | Jan 19 2006, 10:20 PM Post #128 |
|
wat
![]()
|
I beseech thee, almighty dictionary!
Now, now folks... the government is just looking into phone conversations because they feel like it. Surely they're not searching for evidence against suspected terrorists. They're "listening" to it. Like with music. C'mon, people, we know what searching means and we know they're doing it. It's simply actively looking for something. It's the essence of crime.
In theory, they should, but we need amendments for all of them. |
~ Crysta, Zombie Queen![]() Trophy Case
| |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 20 2006, 03:41 PM Post #129 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
Searching is something that is physically done. Like searching through my wallet for money, or breaking into a building to search for whatever. When you are listening in on a conversation, you become witness to whatever is said. Its exactly the same thing as overhearing other people talking.
No no, according to your interpretation, we already have an amendment for all of them. And its absurd. |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| Crysta | Jan 20 2006, 04:26 PM Post #130 |
|
wat
![]()
|
o/' I say to-MAY-to, you say to-MAH-to... o/' And isn't it supposed to be "Sentinel"? The dictionary disagrees with you. It uses this example:
We're assuming the person isn't physically searching through his conscience with his eyeballs. The shoulder angel and devil doesn't actually exist like it does in cartoons. So the dictionary says you can search for something without having to physically look at it, and the dictionary is more valid than you. You're just trying to interpet it in a way that makes you sound right, which you aren't. The one who established searching as a purely physical action is yourself, not any other source.
Well, you DO typically need a warrant to search someone's belongings. It seems to work fine in every other case, unless you want cops barging into your house just because they suspect you for something. In a neighborhood such as mine, they'll probably think I'm a drug dealer if I just stand at a street corner and look at them funny. Now you say if you have nothing to hide you shouldn't worry about it. I know quite a feel people who are naturally more paranoid than your average everyday person, so telling them to be okay with it kind of strikes me as absurd. Then there's the crowd who simply don't trust complete strangers nosing around in their business, government or not. Then there's the people who find it flat-out offensive and view it as a violation of what Americans hold dear. People love their privacy, so sue them. Does it mean these people have something to hide? No, they're just uncomfortable with it and feel they shouldn't have to deal with it from a government who supposedly touts they will always respect your rights, freedom and liberties. It's not that hard to understand. |
~ Crysta, Zombie Queen![]() Trophy Case
| |
![]() |
|
| Reaver | Jan 20 2006, 04:41 PM Post #131 |
|
Troll
![]()
|
Oops! We accidentially tapped teh Democratic Headquarters, now we know their plans.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Brazy CK | Jan 20 2006, 04:46 PM Post #132 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| Inui | Jan 20 2006, 07:25 PM Post #133 |
|
Power of Flower
![]()
|
If I were all of you, I'd simply curl up and die as soon as Crysta posts.
She wins this internet today! Hyuk hyuk! |
| |
![]() |
|
| Crysta | Jan 20 2006, 07:59 PM Post #134 |
|
wat
![]()
|
... I want a trophy instead... They're not the worst crowd I've parried with. The guys at the Golden Sun forum were pretty bad. |
~ Crysta, Zombie Queen![]() Trophy Case
| |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 20 2006, 08:26 PM Post #135 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
Does that really belong in a debate forum? I spell my screen name Sentenal, I don't give a shit that the actual word is Sentinel.
True, this is one instance where one is searching for something thats not physical, but this is still not the same thing as listening in on a conversation.
I don't consider things you say as a belonging, or a possession. That the 4th admendment protects from unwarrent seizures. And really, as was said very early in this topic, national security is a bit more important that privacy in conversations between you and someone outside the country. @Richie: I don't want to hear anything from you about definitions, seeing as how you don't want to accept the definition of terrorism (see that other thread). That definition is so vague, someone could intrupert it so that the government couldn't do a single thing ever without a warrant. |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
3:16 AM Jul 11
|







[/center]





















3:16 AM Jul 11