November 11, 2009
Rhode Island Governor Vetoes E-ZPass Privacy Bill 11-11-09
The Governor appears both anti-freedom and power hungry. There's no reason whatsoever to trade that much freedom in exchange for dubious benefits and almost certain abuses.
November 10, 2009
- Justice Dept. Asked For News Site's Visitor Lists 11-10-09
And what reason, pray tell, did the Justice Department have to get such personal information on me not only to include that I was reading stories on that particular site, but my credit card information and other private data the site might have happened to have? I have a bad feeling that this was a whole lot broader than it needed to be, and that the government won't be giving up any information it managed to collect, either. Nice.
November 6, 2009
- Polk County teacher suing state over fingerprinting 11-06-09
I can't pretend I agree with the teacher's reasons, but I sure do support her actions! The invasiveness of government is out of control whether it be rationalized as "for the children" and "for your safety" or not.
November 5, 2009
- The war on gun owners' privacy 11-05-09
You know, there are some questions you just shouldn't have to answer. In fact, you shouldn't answer them at all. - EPIC Urges Court to Enforce Video Privacy Law 11-04-09
Before I can possibly comment on this story, I have to say this: What in hell was Blockbuster actually thinking?
November 4, 2009
- NSA to store yottabytes of surveillance data in Utah megarepository 11-01-09
Whatever the rationale or the technology, this kind of thing is just plain scary. It only gets scarier when it's understood to be in the hands of the government which itself changes hands from good to bad and from bad to worse (like in 2008) every four years...
October 30, 2009
- COMMENTARY Is right to privacy just a nostalgic American memory? 10-30-09
Yes, but it doesn't have to be. In order to stop the erosion, though, and restore what we can will require us to refuse cooperation with government invasiveness. Is it a pain in the ass? Speaking as somebody who causes problems for anybody who asks intrusive questions, yeah, it is. Is it worth it? Again, I believe the answer is uniquivocally yes. (It's a bonus that sometimes the entertainment value is far greater than the trouble I have to deal with...) - Obama Administration Tells Federal Court Privacy Act Does Not Apply to White House 10-29-09
Actually, the Privacy Act does apply to the White House. Barack Obama just wants to think he's above the law. My guess is that, on this front as well as myriad others, he's got another thing coming... - Want A Job In Akron? Hand Over Your DNA 10-28-09
This story is positively surreal. It's implications, on the other hand, are just plain horrifying.
October 28, 2009
- Little Buddy GPS Device To Keep Tabs On Your Kid 10-27-09
Good idea? Really? At what age do you stop tracking your child? Will you even need to if the kid grows up with it and thinks it's okay? How long until children like him are so used to things like that they have no problem with the cops or the government doing the same thing to them? This is how it all starts, with an idea that sounds like a pretty good one. At first blush, anyway...
The Right to Privacy
The Right to Privacy is not specifically addressed within either the Constitution or Bill of Rights. Perhaps this is because, after carefully spelling out protections for the privacy of one's property (Third, Fourth, Fifth Amendments) and the right to one's opinions or friends (First Amendment), the Founders felt privacy was implicit. Numerous court rulings say privacy is, indeed, implicit within other enumerated rights. Others dismiss the notion of privacy as being apart from the Bill of Rights as nonsense thanks to the Ninth Amendment which clearly delineates the inclusion of all rights not specifically excluded. Or perhaps the Founders considered personal privacy such an inviolate and obvious right, it didn't require a special mention. I personally believe this latter explanation is the case. Be that as it may...
Privacy as a fundamental right
was fully established in law in the court decision Griswold v. Connecticut. Though the court agreed that privacy is, indeed, an independent right inferred from several provisions of the Bill of Rights (the court referenced previous privacy-related decisions based on protections under the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments), it indicated in the Griswold decision that the legal right to privacy had its source in the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court further decreed that privacy is a "fundamental right."
Don't have anything to hide? Okay, me neither. But that doesn't mean I'm inclined to install cameras in my house or volunteer to be searched any time soon, nor am I predisposed to waive my civil rights to prove my innocence. No true freedom lover would—or could.
Want to help preserve privacy? Educate yourself, and then take action!
