Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted...........

[Darwin333]

You're sure hostile today, atacking people for discussing an issue. Bury your head in the sand, as you cut out my comments there's no real risk of the government forcing this on everyone to make your straw man, cut you ignroe the question of other scenarios such as mandatory tracking for people on probation, employer-required tracking, parents having tracking for their children. No, just attacking anyone for discussing these possible changes.

I don't think parents tracking children belongs in the discussion. My children are my responsibility (by law) and I can and should be able to protect them as I see fit. Employers gets a little tougher but generally employers track their vehicles or company cell phones, so as soon as you are off the clock you generally have the ability to stop being tracked while also having the ability to use modern technology. The difference is who owns the technology.

 

[HumblePie]

You're sure hostile today, atacking people for discussing an issue. Bury your head in the sand, as you cut out my comments there's no real risk of the government forcing this on everyone to make your straw man, cut you ignroe the question of other scenarios such as mandatory tracking for people on probation, employer-required tracking, parents having tracking for their children. No, just attacking anyone for discussing these possible changes.

HUH?!?!? Attacking what? I just said I think you are off in the deep end. That's not an attack. That's me giving my opinion on your proposal. And exactly how is that a straw man argument? Again, off in the deep end....

One last thing, last time I checked when people give an opinion that doesn't mean they are hostile. /frowns.

 

[Darwin333]

One interesting thing - there's a lot of concern about tracking, but the President can now order the killing of a US citizen without any review outside the executive branch. No trial, no due process, no check.

Proponents will defend this by claiming there are 'criterion', that it requires certain tihngs be met to get approved, but the bottom line is all these restrictions are within the executive authority of the president.

Glenn Greenwald has witten about this, but it's hardly getting a lot of press, a lot of protest from the public.

But they NEED to be able to murder US citizens in order to protect you from the terrorists! Don't worry though, they are mostly Muslim and brown so as long as your not one of those you have little to worry about, yet. Therein lies the problem, we don't mind as long as we don't think its going to affect us. Just like the people saying they have no problem with the government tracking them don't mind because they think it won't affect them one way or the other. The problem is the government always expands and grows its powers and it always finds new ways to (ab)use them.

IMO, they are intentionally chipping away at our rights and we are nothing more than the frog in the pot.

OT a bit, can the President really just void citizens constitutional rights anytime he pleases like that? Ordering the killing of a US citizen in lieu of attempting to arrest them is blatantly against everything the constitution stands for. Even worse, the orders are given based on simple accusations and we all know the government NEVER wrongfully accuses anyone...

 

[kage69]

One interesting thing - there's a lot of concern about tracking, but the President can now order the killing of a US citizen without any review outside the executive branch. No trial, no due process, no check.

Ugh.