6 ms·

i have a RIGHT to privacy, and so does everyone on American soil. end of argument.

by frogperson 19d ago

15155 19d ago
In public? I have an (actually-enumerated) First Amendment right to record you. End of argument.
- joquarky 18d ago
  Amendments don't protect you from physical harm by other citizens.
  - 15155 18d ago
    No, but my concealed pistol (that pesky second amendment) indeed does. "If you exercise your rights, you will be hurt" - what a world to live in.
    - DangitBobby 17d ago
      Depends on where you are. Defending against getting punched in the face by shooting them will get you thrown in prison a good portion of the time. Sometimes being a piece of shit should result in an ass whupping.
      - 15155 17d ago
        > Depends on where you are. Defending against getting punched in the face by shooting them will get you thrown in prison a good portion of the time. Maybe in liberal California (where your 80 year old grandmother has a duty to retreat), thankfully not in my state. A punch to the face can be fatal, and you don't have to take one. Also, what an idiotic idea that one must assume that a "punch to the face" is all that is going to follow - and not a knife, head smashing on the ground, etc. This is frankly disgusting. > Sometimes being a piece of shit should result in an ass whupping. Got it, sometimes lawfully exercising your rights should mean you befall violence: I am glad I don't live in whatever shithole area you reside in. Perhaps we should extend this ideology to voting for the wrong candidate? - If you don't vote for who I want, it should result in an "ass whupping." Maybe your property: if you don't give me the contents of your wallet, it should result in an "ass whupping." This is bully mentality, and isn't tolerated in polite society. Would a cop in your state tolerate a punch to the face? How would you expect him to respond?
        DangitBobby 16d ago
        I mean, if the guy is going to knife you you can shoot him. Feel free to release your clutched pearls. The law is not moral license. You can legally do lots of disgusting things, like threaten to murder someone over a non-lethal engagement. Lots of those disgusting things warrant a nice punch in the face, and crying about it or declaring the moral high ground isn't going to move the needle. Why are we cry-bullying and hiding behind threat of lethal violence? Pretty ironic that someone who would criticize "liberal" states for not letting you get away with murder somehow thinks THAT remedy is more civilized than run of the mill combat. You can leave your Grandma at home, this isn't about her, this is about you deciding what is legally permissible is the only thing that matters. Definitely "bully mentality" to think fisticuffs shouldn't result in unilateral execution by unhinged randos. Summary execution is the "civilized" response. Would-be murderers probably shouldn't be giving lectures online. You astonish me.
        15155 16d ago
        Good luck with your theories. Think twice before punching people, tough guy.
  - DeluluDon 18d ago
    That a physical threat?
janalsncm 17d ago
1) Except for specific things like third and fourth amendment rights, you don’t have a blanket “privacy” right, much less in public. 2) If your argument is that flock cameras are illegal, take them to court.
- DangitBobby 17d ago
  Everyone knows that the law is what really matters when it comes to prevailing in court. That's why there's no correlation between money spent on legal representation and the outcome of a ruling.
  - janalsncm 16d ago
    In that case, you agree with me that you don’t have a right to privacy for all of the reasons I already stated plus the additional one that you can’t afford to fight it in court.
    - DangitBobby 16d ago
      I generally agree we have no constitutional right to privacy, but I wouldn't agree going to court against someone will result in their illegal behavior against you being remedied.
ButlerianJihad 17d ago
I have been researching family genealogy, and this alleged "privacy" has never actually been a thing at all, much less a "human right". First, it is well-known for anyone who lived in a small town, that every small town had rumor mills, gossip grapevines, and everyone knew everyone else's business, to the extent that there was a daily soap opera drama about relationships, and hard times and good times as well. So this small-town attitude was imported when people urbanized, and a lot of neighborhoods had this sort of grapevine as well. Furthermore, the urban centers established some distinct "brother's keepers" practices. There were the City Directories. Before telephones, these were the White Pages and Yellow Pages. Your name, your occupation, your address. All your neighbors and the businesses on your street. All indexed and alphabetized handily. Everyone in the city would know what you did; they all got subscribed to these directories. These are invaluable resources for researchers today, so that we can find folks and know their professions, sometimes on a year-by-year basis. Census reports were taken every 10 years. These can be highly unreliable resources! The census takers had no way of verifying information or investigating answers! They always took citizens at face-value, so it was the practice of new immigrants and criminals, and others in the shadows, to conceal the truth from the census takers. But nevertheless, some facts were obvious, and so there was good information gathered, and released by USGov, about household compositions. Also, the newspapers have been a crazy treasure trove of information since their inception. I was literally able to track the movements of some of my relatives, because the newspapers in each town would report when a family member, or friend, visited someone. They would say if they came by car, and how long they planned to stay, and where they're from and all that. So anyone traveling in the 1930s and 1940s and so on, their movements were never "private" and you had journalists who acted as Human License Plate Reporters, ensuring that the whole town knew you were hanging out for the weekend!

i have a RIGHT to privacy, and so does everyone on American soil. end of argument.

15155 19d ago

In public? I have an (actually-enumerated) First Amendment right to record you. End of argument.

joquarky 18d ago
Amendments don't protect you from physical harm by other citizens.
- 15155 18d ago
  No, but my concealed pistol (that pesky second amendment) indeed does. "If you exercise your rights, you will be hurt" - what a world to live in.
  - DangitBobby 17d ago
    Depends on where you are. Defending against getting punched in the face by shooting them will get you thrown in prison a good portion of the time. Sometimes being a piece of shit should result in an ass whupping.
    - 15155 17d ago
      > Depends on where you are. Defending against getting punched in the face by shooting them will get you thrown in prison a good portion of the time. Maybe in liberal California (where your 80 year old grandmother has a duty to retreat), thankfully not in my state. A punch to the face can be fatal, and you don't have to take one. Also, what an idiotic idea that one must assume that a "punch to the face" is all that is going to follow - and not a knife, head smashing on the ground, etc. This is frankly disgusting. > Sometimes being a piece of shit should result in an ass whupping. Got it, sometimes lawfully exercising your rights should mean you befall violence: I am glad I don't live in whatever shithole area you reside in. Perhaps we should extend this ideology to voting for the wrong candidate? - If you don't vote for who I want, it should result in an "ass whupping." Maybe your property: if you don't give me the contents of your wallet, it should result in an "ass whupping." This is bully mentality, and isn't tolerated in polite society. Would a cop in your state tolerate a punch to the face? How would you expect him to respond?
      - DangitBobby 16d ago
        I mean, if the guy is going to knife you you can shoot him. Feel free to release your clutched pearls. The law is not moral license. You can legally do lots of disgusting things, like threaten to murder someone over a non-lethal engagement. Lots of those disgusting things warrant a nice punch in the face, and crying about it or declaring the moral high ground isn't going to move the needle. Why are we cry-bullying and hiding behind threat of lethal violence? Pretty ironic that someone who would criticize "liberal" states for not letting you get away with murder somehow thinks THAT remedy is more civilized than run of the mill combat. You can leave your Grandma at home, this isn't about her, this is about you deciding what is legally permissible is the only thing that matters. Definitely "bully mentality" to think fisticuffs shouldn't result in unilateral execution by unhinged randos. Summary execution is the "civilized" response. Would-be murderers probably shouldn't be giving lectures online. You astonish me.
        15155 16d ago
        Good luck with your theories. Think twice before punching people, tough guy.
- DeluluDon 18d ago
  That a physical threat?

janalsncm 17d ago

1) Except for specific things like third and fourth amendment rights, you don’t have a blanket “privacy” right, much less in public. 2) If your argument is that flock cameras are illegal, take them to court.

DangitBobby 17d ago
Everyone knows that the law is what really matters when it comes to prevailing in court. That's why there's no correlation between money spent on legal representation and the outcome of a ruling.
- janalsncm 16d ago
  In that case, you agree with me that you don’t have a right to privacy for all of the reasons I already stated plus the additional one that you can’t afford to fight it in court.
  - DangitBobby 16d ago
    I generally agree we have no constitutional right to privacy, but I wouldn't agree going to court against someone will result in their illegal behavior against you being remedied.

ButlerianJihad 17d ago

I have been researching family genealogy, and this alleged "privacy" has never actually been a thing at all, much less a "human right". First, it is well-known for anyone who lived in a small town, that every small town had rumor mills, gossip grapevines, and everyone knew everyone else's business, to the extent that there was a daily soap opera drama about relationships, and hard times and good times as well. So this small-town attitude was imported when people urbanized, and a lot of neighborhoods had this sort of grapevine as well. Furthermore, the urban centers established some distinct "brother's keepers" practices. There were the City Directories. Before telephones, these were the White Pages and Yellow Pages. Your name, your occupation, your address. All your neighbors and the businesses on your street. All indexed and alphabetized handily. Everyone in the city would know what you did; they all got subscribed to these directories. These are invaluable resources for researchers today, so that we can find folks and know their professions, sometimes on a year-by-year basis. Census reports were taken every 10 years. These can be highly unreliable resources! The census takers had no way of verifying information or investigating answers! They always took citizens at face-value, so it was the practice of new immigrants and criminals, and others in the shadows, to conceal the truth from the census takers. But nevertheless, some facts were obvious, and so there was good information gathered, and released by USGov, about household compositions. Also, the newspapers have been a crazy treasure trove of information since their inception. I was literally able to track the movements of some of my relatives, because the newspapers in each town would report when a family member, or friend, visited someone. They would say if they came by car, and how long they planned to stay, and where they're from and all that. So anyone traveling in the 1930s and 1940s and so on, their movements were never "private" and you had journalists who acted as Human License Plate Reporters, ensuring that the whole town knew you were hanging out for the weekend!