Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Ok, I think that I understand it better now that you've given me the statutory language. It appears to me that contents of emails are required to be kept by service providers. However, it also explicitely states that this information can only be accessed by a warrant. It is legal for the government to read your mail - if they have a warrant. It is legal for the government to listen to your phone calls - if they have a warrant. It is legal for the government to listen to the conversations you have with your wife in bed - if they have a warrant. All this law does is make that kind of surveillance accessable to the government so that they can get use a warrant to access it.
They still need to show probable cause to a judge. As I mentioned before, criminals have no right to privacy. It's the narrowest implied meaning of the 4th Amendment. Its since been expanded, but I don't think that any sane person would argue that the government doesn't have the right and duty to listen in on your plans to use your Acme Brand slingshot to launch yourself into Yankee Stadium in order to smack that smug look off of Jeter's face. One of the fundamental roles of government is to protect the population - not that Jeter doesn't deserve to be smacked.
|
I guess the Red Sox fans will love your Jeter analogy.
Does it bother you at all that they may require ISPs to maintain your correspondence and activity for long periods of time just on the chance that you may break the law someday? Couldn't they also then require the telcoms to record all your calls in case they may need/want them in the future? All with a warrant of course.