1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

electronic surveillance

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by El_Guero, Aug 21, 2006.

  1. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    I seem to recall that the Articles of Impeachment brought against President Nixon included impeachment for warrantless wiretaps and unauthorized surveillance. So much for Bush's theory that he the authority to do so. Nixon didn't, and Bush doesn't.
     
  2. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    What Nixon 'did' was very different from wiretapping international terrorist orgainzations . . .

    Unless you think the Democrats are terrorists?

    I am not sure that I can go there with you . . .
     
  3. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    You really don't get it . . .

    . . . you think you are at home with your atari or its latest highest priced replacement playing doom and this is all fun.

    Body parts are all that they are finding

    . . . pieces of teeth . . . Pieces of skull tissue . . . Pieces of DNA

    This is not what the Constitution expected to defend us against. Then the enemy was a foreign army. Liberties were in place for the average criminal . . . and the criminal could be shot on someone's property with out the property owner worrying about a CSI saying it was not really self defense.

    The enemy is no longer a country . . . it is individual people working through international corporations.

    Yet you want them protected . . . by the Constitution that begins with:

    We the People of the United States . . . nowhere does it give an exception for foreign terrorists.

    Or, stupid college kids . . . although we do give them exceptions by the 'rule of law'.


     
  4. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    When you vote for anyone to bug my car - You voted for them to bug your house, your bedroom, and most definitely your phone conversations with terrorist organizations.

    Don't tell me that my loss of Constitutional freedon is smaller and less important than yours.
     
  5. Daisy

    Daisy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    For the seventh time, what information do you think the car's black boxes are transmitting?
    You didn't read the article you referenced, did you? I'll quote it for you:
    You called him a non-terrorist yourself...so why would you want to treat him unlawfully and violate the Constitution?

    A good part - the Bill of Rights - expected to defend us against our own overreaching government.

    Except the assassins and seditionists - and, later, the successionists.

    Liberties are in place for all citizens and most residents and visitors.

    What has CSI got to do with this thread?

    Or what Pogo said.

    Foreign terrorists or the US non-terrorist? The Constitution should not be violated, the laws should be enforced with justice for all.

    What do you mean by "exception"? On one hand, you seem to want to be able to violate some people's rights, while on the other, you seem to want to make them the exception to the laws.

    I do not want to make exceptions to the rule of law - laws should apply equally according to how they are written (different laws and rights may apply to citizens than to foreigners).
     
  6. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Daisy,

    You really do not get it.

    For the eighth time - you want my car bugged . . . and that is just creepy.

    If I told you that I wanted to bug your car - you would not be a pleasant person.

    Yet, you do not want to afford me that common courtesy of treating me in the same manner that you want to be treated.
     
  7. Daisy

    Daisy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Transference...

    It is not true that I want your car bugged, I don't care one way or the other if you choose to buy one that has the device. If you don't want your car to have the black box, buy one without it. Your choice - unlike government surveillence where you do not have a choice and are not notified that it is taking place.

    If you asked me to buy the product from you so you could do it, I might just say, "No, thanks." Hey, what information would you be collecting and why? (eight)

    You are flat-out wrong. I want you to have all the protections the Constitution and US laws provide. I am not forcing you to buy a car with the device.

    For the nineth time, what information do you think the car's black boxes are transmitting? This is a simple question.
     
  8. Daisy

    Daisy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Side note - it's interesting that the people who complain that I don't understand or that I got their stance wrong are the very ones who refuse to answer questions or explain.
     
  9. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yep, it's because the "tin foil hat" crowd has no substance to their wild assertions. Does anyone really think that standard automobiles transmit personal information, or any information, to someone? Yeah, you can buy LoJack to track your car if stolen, but that is something YOU have to add aftermarket. On board computers DO collect engine performance faults. This is not transmitted, but stored in the car so the mechanic can see what happened when something doesn't work right. But I doubt Ford cares about when EG goes to the local Kroger to buy a gallon of milk.
     
  10. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Daisy

    The article said that all cars will be bugged with or without your permission . . .

    And since you are such an agreeable person that likes being monitored, I thought I would inform you of what the article did not tell you & I would wish you pleasant dreams:

    Your bedroom is next - sleep tight and don't let the bed bugs bite . . . No pun intended.

    ;)

    And you were worried about the terrorists . . .
     
  11. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey there! "tin foil hat"!

    Read the article

    The information can be used against you in a court of law . . . without your permission and without a warrant . . .

    They cannot go into your house without a warrant - but they can go into your car.

    So the lawyer downloads your data . . . and there is not a thing you can do about it. If you are not worried about that - I again for the 10th time ask: why are you worried about a terrorist being bugged?


     
  12. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can the tin foil hat people move back to the OP?

    I realize that Roswell is interesting - but there is enough in the article.



     
  13. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Computers are the best thing that has happened to car improvements in the last twenty years. Computers are a very cheap way of making the engine run much more efficiently and allowing the factory or shop to gather sensor information.

    By the way, there is no positioning information that goes to the car's operating computer. It has no idea where the car is at nor does it care. It is simply to adjust fuel and air mixture based on many sensors located in the intakes and outputs (exhaust).

    Usually, the anti-lock brakes are operated by a seperate 32 bit computer that measures wheel movement 100 times per second, which is fast enough to decide whether the tires are skidding or still maintaining road contact.

    New computers built into SUV's are used to adjust the actual balance of the vehicle to keep it stable in a drastic maneuver. It takes input from accelerometers (little devices that measure acceleration and deceleration) and then controls air-jacks or struts very quickly in an attempt to prevent roll-over or other loss of control.

    If you ask me, computers are a GREAT addition to automobiles and they are also a "cheap" addition which provide much more than their cost in benefits to the owner of the car. There is NO secret stuff hidden there. There may be data stored before an accident, but this is the only possible data, besides engine condition. This is no different than a black-box on an airplane to store information to help prevent new accidents from occurring. If your not at fault, then what are you worried about? If you are at fault, then you need to fess up and have your insurance pay for the other guy. Its the Christian way.
     
  14. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Phillip

    Read the article . . . they are talking about black boxes (data recorders) like on airplanes . . . the data is not whether or not your oil needs to be changed. The article indicated that the data will be used for or against you in a court of law . . . without a warrant.

    It may be good - it may be bad. But, if we can be monitored without warrants - why are we worried about monitoring terrorists?

    That was the OP - I tho't . . .
     
Loading...