Dependable Erection

Wednesday, July 09, 2008

"The Second Amendment makes all the others possible"

That's funny. I don't see anybody storming the Congress right now to ensure that our 4th amendment rights are preserved.

Labels:

11 Comments:

  • Obligatory link to the roll call - remember this in November and beyond. The Cliff's notes edition:

    Clinton (D-NY), Nay
    Obama (D-IL), Yea
    McCain (R-AZ), Not Voting
    Burr (R-NC), Yea
    Dole (R-NC), Yea

    I suppose this is what Obama really means when he talks about "change you can believe in." Is there any way I can go back and change my primary vote?

    By Blogger Jeremy T, at 6:00 PM  

  • I keep hearing the phrase "more and better Democrats." Days like this make me wonder why i bother. At least we got more than half of the caucus to vote no.

    By Blogger Barry, at 6:20 PM  

  • Now that she's not running for President anymore, I guess Hill can finally vote her convictions.

    Obama has the ugly job of reaching out to white working class voters, and those guys would have voted Yea.

    Just plain sucks all the way around. How many telecom co's are based in Illinois?

    By Blogger Tony, at 7:55 PM  

  • All those "white working class" voters are going to hear is that Obama flip-flopped. This was a winning issue for Democrats. He should have stuck with his original promise to filibuster.

    By Blogger Barry, at 9:32 PM  

  • Constitution? Ah, who needs it....

    What the heck happened to Obama anyway?

    Yes, still better than McCain but c'mon dude.

    By Blogger Warren, at 9:46 PM  

  • I gotta say I am massively disappointed with Mr. Obama on this one. And considering how low my expectations were for him to begin with, this is really saying something.

    By Blogger Brian, at 10:59 PM  

  • Come on Barry, we all know that the 4th amendment isn't a universal right anymore. You yourself believe it shouldn't apply to renters' homes, why should it apply to foreigners phones?

    :)

    By Blogger crc128, at 7:48 AM  

  • Oh, come on, Colin. You aren't seriously going to argue that conducting a regularly scheduled inspection of a business property to ensure that health and safety regulations are being met constitutes an "unreasonable search" are you?

    whatever will i tell the fire marshall and the elevator inspector the next time they come to my office building?

    By Blogger Barry, at 8:46 AM  

  • No, I'm not claiming that regular inspections of business property held open for a public purpose is a violation of the 4th Amendment.

    For instance, fire or elevator inspection of an apartment community's common area would be expected and normal.

    I am, however, claiming that the private sphere of rental property (not open to the public) is.

    However, if one takes your argument to the natural conclusion, there is a contradiction. The phone company owns the phone lines and circuits and uses them to produce income - so they're business property. Therefore, inspection of them for safety (terrorism and criminal activity are safety concerns), and the conditions therein (conversations) should not offend you under your stated rationale.

    Under my rationale, neither of these searches would be allowed (though the public space inspection would be fine).

    By Blogger crc128, at 10:00 AM  

  • it's probably a moot point, since the folks in Raleigh are going to make it impossible to implement a rental property inspection program anyway, and the Congress has decided that government searches of records and conversations of US citizens (not only foreigners) without a warrant is OK.

    but rental housing, which is subject to, for example, regulation under the equal housing codes, is most definitely in the "public sphere." The right of the people to be secure in their "papers and effects" has always been interpreted to include conversations over tethered lines in which a reasonable expectation of privacy is implicit.

    If we agree that the state has an overriding interest in limiting the spread of food-borne disease, which gives it the right to conduct health inspections of restaurants, then why does the state not have the right to conduct health related inspections of the rental property in the community for the same purpose.

    As a restaurant customer, i'm entitled to know what grade the restaurant received from the inspector. As a renter, shouldn't i be entitled to have the same set of information about the rental property i'm getting ready to enter into a lease agreement for?

    You keep trying to cast this as a violation of the tenants' rights. this has nothing to do with the tenants, and everything to do with the landlord.

    Which i suspect you know.

    By Blogger Barry, at 10:13 AM  

  • I'll be out for a bit this afternoon getting my car inspected. Apologies in advance for not getting comments posted right away.

    By Blogger Barry, at 12:32 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home