Right To Privacy
12.27.04Some of you might have heard about a case recently where a kid was guilty of somethin, cos the mother of the victim overheard a phone conversation that proved the kid guilty. Well the stupid court threw the guilty charge out, because, supposedly, that kid had ‘a right to privacy’ in a phone conversation with the victim.
I don’t exactly remember the details of the case, and right now I’m too lazy to search for it. But one thing came to mind when hearing about it. What a load of buffalo puckey. Who in their right mind thinks that a stupid punk teenager has a right to privacy from their own parents when a criminal investigation is in process. I mean, I understand the unwritten rules of privacy, for example, you wouldent want yer mom diggin’ thru yer underwear drawer etc. But in a court of law??? And the guilty punk just got off scott free???
These stupid kids don’t pay bills, don’t provide clothing and shelter for themselves. They don’t vote, they don’t serve in the military, bottom line is they have no freakin’ right to privacy.
So what we have here is the federal government telling you what you can and cannot do to/with your own children. Time to pull out the chainsaw and do some major cutbacks on government size. I think it’s gettin a wee bit too big fer its britches.
Speaking of privacy, there’s been alot of talk about puttin some kinda fancy GPS chips on folks nowadays to keep tabs on them. And I would agree that it could come in very handy on knowing where yer kids are, or to have em on soldiers over in the sandbox.
I mean, if a kid or a soldier was to be abducted, we would know exactly where to find em. Only thing is, when you want that chip out, you gotta be able to get er outta there. If I had the option, I woulden’t mind throwin em inside my offspring (someday when I get em) and when they turn 18 can have em takin out. That would be neat, and probably a load off my mind.
And if these dirty terrorists dogs knew that our soldiers where chipped, they woulden’t even attempt to kidnapp em.
Of course there’s always the threat and possibilty that these chips could fall into the wrong hands. So there would definetly need to be checks and balances for this. But it is something that could very well be a standard issue in the near future. I’m sure there’s plenty of Pro’s and Con’s to them.
Thats absolutely ridiculous, i dont give a damn about supposed rights to privacy when using the phone if yur a kid. yur privacy is limited to what your parents give you, believe me, I KNOW. If my dad heard that that convo and i was the one that shouldve been guilty, screw the courts, i’d be in my parents “prison” for a few years regardless what the damn court says. SCREW THE DAMN LIBERALS IN OUR “FAIR” COURTS.
# December 27th, 2004 at 7:59 pmThe background on this is that WA state has a law about listening on the phone being a violation of privacy rights. Mom heard defendant teenage punk talking to her daughter on a cordless extension phone.
Kid tells girl about a robbery or burglary he pulled off. Mom had suspected he was a dirty rotten scoundrel and that’s why she was listening - to protect her daughter from this guy.
When mom hears the punk confess, she calls police. Kid gets convicted, using his statement. Judge overturns the conviction because mom violated the state law by listening to the conversation of her daughter.
You know what the REALLY stupid thing about this is? I heard an interview with the kid’s defense attorney. He said he could not understand why the d.a. chose to prosecute his client instead of the MOM because she broke the law. He is debating suing her for what she did and is pressuring the d.a. to prosecute her criminally.
How absurd is this??????
What do you think would have happened if this guy was a child molester arranging to meet the teenage daughter somewhere to molest her? Same outcome? Incredible.
Sorry for the long post.
# December 27th, 2004 at 8:22 pmSubdermal implantation of GPS devices leaves kidnap victims vulnerable to “surgeries” for extracting the tracking device. This device is a risk if implantation leaves an easily seen scar where the device is planted. However, woe to the person who has a scar not caused by the GPS, as several attempts may be made to “fish” a non-existant device out of a person’s arm, for example.
# December 28th, 2004 at 10:16 amSubdermal implanation => “surgeries” for extraction by extremists. Ugh.
# December 28th, 2004 at 10:17 amThat chip is called the “Verichip” and I think it was recently approved by the FDA. It’s made by a company called Applied Digital Solutions.
# December 28th, 2004 at 1:48 pmY’all ever heard of “The Mark of the Beast”?! See Rev. 13:16-17: “(16)He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, (17)so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark…”.
You ain’t catch’n me or my family with one those things.
Thanks for the details that I was lacking Karen. And the absurdity is staggering, but sadly it’s not anything surprising comin from these leftist moonbats.
C.P. Baker - Yea, I used to think that it would have some connection with the mark of the beast. But I’m not so sure. I guess it depends on your view of the book of Revelation. If you take it all very literally, then woulden’t it require a blazon 666?
I’m still not sure what my thoughts are on it all though. But it possibly could have a connection.
# December 28th, 2004 at 6:33 pmChad, ever see the movie boondock saints?
# December 28th, 2004 at 9:55 pmYea, the 2 Irish brothers who go around taking out the garbage of the city.
# December 28th, 2004 at 9:57 pmIt’s funny you say that, I just bought that movie today. I love it!
# December 29th, 2004 at 12:18 amthat movie is amazing, best line: is it dead!
# December 29th, 2004 at 6:44 am