Big deal. SPD violates the 4th Amendment more frequently than a Dick Cheney heart murmur. THAT'S who you should really fear!

Josh, someone made a comment on a blog post I did. Should I reply? It's on the Pictureless Dukes song. You know what you mean by Panopticon Superstate, ?

You can have my privacy... when you pry it away from my cold dead fingers. It's people! Privacy is people!!!

Suck it, AT&T

Privacy?? You have to be kidding, people are worried about privacy in an age where every freak is desperate to get onto reality TV or posts themselves on YouTube and now we want privacy? That is one right we could not give away fast enough!

Americans really are stupid. We never should have rebelled against the crown back in the 18th Century. We have demonstated that most of us do not want our rights, nor do most deserve them.

@ Charlton Heston. Americans do not even get tiffed if they loose their rights. And you think we would actually fight to the death for them? LOL!!!

Wev, Josh? Really? Wev?

Cato,

I think the issue is more of tangeable verus intangeable rights.

A LOT of Amurkins would blow their tops at the merest mention of say, restrictions on their Second Amendment right to bear arms, but on the other hand, would blink dumbly at the mention of preserving their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure of the little electronic bits of data that comprise their telephone records. The former is a physical thing; they can hold it, and it represents an object they can utilize in the defense of their personal privacy and safety. Electronic data files don't have the same sense of tangeable security; it's not something they can touch, in most instances, they are only barely aware of its existence, so they tend to not attach the same amount of importance to it.

I'm not arguing that they shouldn't care just as much about protecting their right to privacy with regard to something like this, just that I can understand to a degree why they don't.