VaporTrail Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 It's been a crazy busy news week, let's not forget about this important legislation. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/04/opinion-meeks-cispa-cyber/ CISPA is changing at the margins but it still has four major problems:An overly broad, almost unlimited definition of the information can be shared with government agencies. And because that info is shared “notwithstanding any law,” CISPA trumps any federal or state privacy law that currently prohibits disclosure. Enactment is likely to lead to expansion of the government’s role in the monitoring of private communications. It could shift control of government cybersecurity efforts from civilian agencies to the NSA. It creates a backdoor wiretap program because the information shared with the government isn’t limited to just cybersecurity, but could also be used for other purposes, such as law enforcement or by intelligence agencies. Obama said he'd veto it if it gets to him. Think he'll still do it after this week? Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 I hope to God he does not sign it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 It's been a crazy busy news week, let's not forget about this important legislation. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/04/opinion-meeks-cispa-cyber/ Obama said he'd veto it if it gets to him. Think he'll still do it after this week? Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither. But they won't use it for just randomly checking normal citizens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 despite my distrust of the Obama administration I don't have much problem with expanding the powers of surveillance. I think usually those who fight the hardest against it probably have something to hide. I understand that.as two be silly Ben Franklin quote, fellas, we've done that years ago. That horse has left the barn. just recently the authorities were questioning hardware and electronics stores about who may have purchased parts to make the bombs in Boston. Fine.and yet if someone suggests going through library records to see who has checked out books on bomb making recently some of you guys flip. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 The horse is only looking out of the window, Steve. That's no reason to take the barn walls down, and tear down the pasture fence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 If you say so. Personally I think we are as free as the ruling class allows us to be. We can say do whatever we wish as long as they deem it to be politically correct. And I don't know which of the Bill of Rights exists without a disclaimer. Also I'd wager its not a big task to find out what ever the government wants anyway. Also amazon.com and Google probably have a bigger dossier on us than anybody at the FBI. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comeonman Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 It's been a crazy busy news week, let's not forget about this important legislation. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/04/opinion-meeks-cispa-cyber/ Obama said he'd veto it if it gets to him. Think he'll still do it after this week? Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither. damn it vapor I can't figure you out, that's something someone extremely conservative like me would say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 Vapor is liberal in some views and conservative in others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted April 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 I lean Democrat on social and fiscal issues, I'm probably the farthest left on the board for these topics. For homeland security, national defense, and foreign policy I strongly align with the Libertarian party. For the most part, I think the Constitution kicks ass, and I'd like to see that we adhere to it whenever possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comeonman Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 Oh man that just opens thousands of questions up. Liberal on social issues but a constitutionalist, very interesting. First question, totally random. Abortion: constitutional or not? I'm going to have to start a new thread for all the questions I would have for a liberal leaning believer in the constitution lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 He appears to be a big fan of abortion, so ill guess his answer is thumbs up. Constitutional. I personally think the constitution is exactly as useful as the bible. I'll let you decide how useful that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comeonman Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 Well that's about as odd of a statement as I've ever heard. I'll assume that you believe the constitution is useless, which it will be sometime in my life if the Supreme Court has anything to do with it. I don't get what why you would relate it to the bible. The bible being useful depends completely on the reader. The constitution being useful depends on which judge is interpreting it. After typing that I'm starting to see your point in a weird way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted April 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 Abortion isn't in the Constitution so in theory it should fall to the states to decide. I, however, have a problem with the government trying to take away a woman's right to choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comeonman Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 I would disagree that it is not covered in the constitution. No one shall be deprived of life without due process would be my argument. But I also believe that an unborn child once conceived is a human being with human rights. Not everyone sees it that way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted April 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 Is murder unconstitutional? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 I would disagree that it is not covered in the constitution. No one shall be deprived of life without due process would be my argument. But I also believe that an unborn child once conceived is a human being with human rights. Not everyone sees it that way I don't think a clump of a two then 4 the 8 cells is a human being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 He appears to be a big fan of abortion, so ill guess his answer is thumbs up. Constitutional. I personally think the constitution is exactly as useful as the bible. I'll let you decide how useful that is. Cysko... no one is a fan of abortion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comeonman Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 I don't think a clump of a two then 4 the 8 cells is a human being.hmmm... Wonder how many times babies are aborted when they are only a clump of 8 cells, but again that is the argument... When does life begin. Ever heard of late term abortions? Look at what planned parenthood is advocating these days, might surprise you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comeonman Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 Is murder unconstitutional?yes, I'm sure you have heard people call abortion murder. Should have picked a different question lol. Just interested in your different somewhat liberal and somewhat conservative views Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 So, seriously, exactly what bad things do you think you could or would happen in our day to day lives because of this legislation? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted April 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 yes, I'm sure you have heard people call abortion murder. Should have picked a different question lol. Just interested in your different somewhat liberal and somewhat conservative views The point I'm trying to make is neither abortion nor murder are touched on by the Constitution. You mentioned "life without due process" but that's in the amendment pertaining to the rights of those who are being tried for crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadNewsBrowns Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 So, seriously, exactly what bad things do you think you could or would happen in our day to day lives because of this legislation? WSS I see where you are coming from and you are right, probably nothing. But it's the principle, CISPA is an invasion of privacy. And who knows what it could snowball into, best to nip it in the bud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted April 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 So, seriously, exactly what bad things do you think you could or would happen in our day to day lives because of this legislation? WSS Vague wording. The language of the bill allows ISPs to determine anyone's traffic is a risk to their network, and can hand your data to the government or put a hold on your account at will. CISPA isn't going to make it any tougher to be a cyber-criminal, it just adds risk to law abiding citizens. This bill makes your information obtainable to the government without a warrant. You might not have a problem with that, but I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 maybe fan is inaccurate, but he's certainly not a foe of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 Well that's about as odd of a statement as I've ever heard. I'll assume that you believe the constitution is useless, which it will be sometime in my life if the Supreme Court has anything to do with it. I don't get what why you would relate it to the bible. The bible being useful depends completely on the reader. The constitution being useful depends on which judge is interpreting it. After typing that I'm starting to see your point in a weird way Not at all, not at all. I believe the Bible has a lot of merit, but to sit there and lean on it and call it the absolute doctrine of god that must be followed to the letter is just plain silly. Frankly the Constitution is much the same. It has undeniable merit, but to look to it 250 years later as an absolute is foolish. By the way that's not that odd of a statement, especially around here. And don't worry, a lot of people don't know what the hell to make of a lot of things I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 hmmm... Wonder how many times babies are aborted when they are only a clump of 8 cells, but again that is the argument... When does life begin. Ever heard of late term abortions? Look at what planned parenthood is advocating these days, might surprise you Except a lump of 8 cells isn't a baby... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 Not at all, not at all. I believe the Bible has a lot of merit, but to sit there and lean on it and call it the absolute doctrine of god that must be followed to the letter is just plain silly. Frankly the Constitution is much the same. It has undeniable merit, but to look to it 250 years later as an absolute is foolish. By the way that's not that odd of a statement, especially around here. And don't worry, a lot of people don't know what the hell to make of a lot of things I say. Yeah I pretty much agree with Cysko here. To look to a 250 year old document as the end all be all in policy and legislation is dumb. A lot has changed... You want to look at the principles of the document, and the ideology, sure. But specifics? Idk... Same with the Bible. Sure, there are a lot of good messages in there. But to take it all literally is foolish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 maybe fan is inaccurate, but he's certainly not a foe of it It is inaccurate, but its what you say every time this debate comes up. You call the pro choice side "pro abortion" or "fans of abortion". That's not true at all. Your side calls themselves "pro life" as if the other is "anti-life" or something.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted April 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 Yeah I pretty much agree with Cysko here. To look to a 250 year old document as the end all be all in policy and legislation is dumb. A lot has changed... You want to look at the principles of the document, and the ideology, sure. But specifics? Idk... Same with the Bible. Sure, there are a lot of good messages in there. But to take it all literally is foolish The Constitution is not simply a 250 year old document like the Bible is a 2000 year old document. We've been changing the Constitution for over 200 years, as needed, to keep up with the times. When the situation is dire enough, the Constitution bends to the will of its people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 I don't call people that, woody. But now that you mention it, damn you anti life guys to hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.