How do you feel about Dems in the Senate wanting to allow Law Enforcement to read your emails without warrants?

[Uncle Pennybags]

"CNET has learned that Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans' e-mail, is scheduled for next week.

Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-575522...&tag=title

[Trumpet Warrior]

opposed

[Antie Pantie]

Violation of privacy ... but I think I'm only concerned because of the slippery-slope argument. I know that I personally am not doing anything wrong that would warrant the government fishing through my emails, but the more and more you give government, the more and more it takes.

[Patricia]

typical communist intrusion into private lives of people.

but if this Senate bill stands, it has to be sent to the House to pass.

and the Republicans in the House will defeat it.

[Felonious Monkey]

That's an abuse of legislative power. If that bill passes and is used to convict someone of a crime, it will undoubtedly be challenged as an invasion of privacy. This would be ripe for a SCOTUS ruling.

[scribblo]

I'm against it.

[Ryde.On]

The reason the constitution is yellow and crinkly is because the Libs have been pissing on it for decades.

[Brown9510]

Email is generally sent clear text. I can be read by anyone sniffing any server or switch that it passes through... therefore there is no expectation of privacy.

[Expectation of privacy is a legal test which is crucial in defining the scope of the applicability of the privacy protections of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is related to, but is not the same thing as a right of privacy, a much broader concept which is found in many legal systems (see privacy law).]

It is possible to encrypt email, but it must be set up with the recipient before hand, which makes it impractical for general use.

However... if you are planning a terrorist attack, it might be worth your while.

[Me Ne Frego]

Democrats are the good guys, right? That is what I hear anyway...mostly from democrats.

[CJ]

Gee -- when I opposed the so-called "Patriot Act" and the endless violations of one's rights to privacy by the Bush Administration, including warrantless wire tapping, I was told by neoconjobs: "If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about."

So therefore:

"If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about."