Have our privacy rights been eroded to point where the police are coming to your house next?

[thomhartmann]

Run time: 09:16 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQVD2C7j8U4   Posted on YouTube: May 27, 2010 By YouTube Member: thomhartmann Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: May 27, 2010 By DU Member: thomhartmann Views on DU: 995

 
The Thom Hartmann Program can be heard daily M-F 12-3pm ET. Visit www.thomhartmann.com to listen live, join the community or purchase a podcast.

[Joanne98]

1. The 4th amendment is dead.

[izquierdista]

2. How do we define privacy?

Any way the corporations desire, Tom. If they want pictures of their oil spill kept quiet, that's the kind of privacy they will have.

[Uncle Joe]

3. Regarding Griswold vs Connecticut and Clarence Thomas' view that the Constitution

doesn't provide for the right of privacy how they can square that logic with laws against indecency?

If there is no right to privacy on what grounds can anyone be arrested for walking down the street nude?

By having laws against indecency the state De Facto recognizes that which is public from that which private.

Thanks for the thread, thomhartmann.

[CHelms]

4. Privacy isn't dead, it's moot.

We still have all these laws requiring warrants, reasonable suspicion, etc. but with signals bouncing all over the planet those laws have been bypassed until there are more holes than cheese. The Framers had no way of knowing that electronic signals would one day be bouncing off of satellites thousands of miles above the planet, to be picked up by anyone with the ability to "catch" them. We still have privacy laws, but they are like a dam whose top is 50 feet under water. No matter what anybody says, no matter what laws get passed or what noble intentions are still out there, there are just too damn many things flying through the air, too many trap doors, too many ways to listen in, too many ways for people to know what you are doing, what you are saying, where you are surfing, who you are talking to, etc. This was a problem long before the Bush administration started exploiting it under the guise of "battling terrorism."

[DRex]

5. Child porn charge AGAINST A CHILD!?

Are you mad?

[kelly1mm]

6. The theory is that the child sending the image is distributing child porn.

However what if a 17 year old sends a naked picture to an 18 year old SO? Should the receiver be off the hook? What if he/she sends that same image to a 3rd party? Is that 3rd party similarly off the hook since the original desemination was made by a consenting minor? Lots of what ifs to think about.

[DRex]

7. Which doesn't even apply in this situation,

because the photos in question were uncovered by a snooping adult. They should just mind their own damn business.

I've got no problem with kids being kids with other kids. The problem arises when snoopy vice principal or whoever sticks their nose where it decidedly does not belong.

[kelly1mm]

9. I am sorry for the thread drift and you are right - the OP was not about

my hypothetical. However, if you want, I would love to hear your thoughts on what I asked.

You said you have no problem with kids being kids. What about the 18 year old who is dating a 17 year old? Is (s)he a "kid"? What about the 23 year old who (s)he forwards the picture to? Do you think that "kids" who consent to the pictures/videos being taken makes such pictures not child porn? This really is a thorny issue and I am trying to figure it out myself to be intellectually consistent.

[DRex]

12. I think porn is in the eye of the beholder...

and that if I found pictures like that on a kids phone I would delete them and tell the kid to be careful. I would not announce to the school and the world that there are nude pictures of this kid and that we should all have a look and decide how to punish them.

As for the kids taking the pictures, we should encourage caution on their part, and as soon as such material passes into the hands of an adult, that adult is responsible for their own actions. I don't know where the legal lines between the required ages of consensual partners should be. That's always a blurry issue, and even varies case to case, but if we're talking third parties I think it's quite clear.

All these legal boundries vary from place to place, but the problem here was that no one simply acted responsibly or sensibly. It was a total non-issue until snoopy teacher came along. Stupid behaviour.

[JoeyT]

10. That's already happened a couple of times.

The last one I remember reading was a pair of kids in Florida. The third party didn't get charged with anything, but it was the girl's family he sent it to. The ages were 18 and 16. The 18 year old boy will be on the sex offender list until he's 43.
There have been cases where everyone involved was charged and put on the sex offender registry.

No one is off the hook. This is a moral crusade. Moral crusades are typically known for zero tolerance attitudes.

[kelly1mm]

11. So what would you propose to be the legal standard? If the minor

"consents" to the picture being taken is it ipso facto not child porn? I really don't know what the corect answer is.

[JoeyT]

14. I haven't the foggiest what it should be.

But what it is now certainly isn't it.

What makes it doubly stupid is the guy could have had all the sex in the world with the girl: She was over her state's age of consent for sex. But sending a picture to someone she could legally have sex with made them both sex offenders.

[Devil_Fish]

18. a minor does not have the right to consent...

that right falls to the parents. see my post down thread.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. Every phone I know has a security code. Since hers was subject to confiscation by the school

she should have used one. I made sure my daughters did. That is the practical answer, I will leave the legal niceties to others.

[DRex]

13. mine doesn't

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. I would check your manual, even the early ones did

I use it in case my phone gets lost or stolen. Inherently there is a large amount of personal data on it.

[DRex]

16. Thanks for the tip!

I'll have to check it out. Don't want all my naked photos leaking! jk.

[Devil_Fish]

17. What is all this crap about kids not having the same rights as adults??

As far as I am concerned, the only right a minor does not have is the right to consent to sex, or a search of their personal belongings including their purse, phone, back-pack, clothing, and car. When my daughter is old enough I am going to teach her that she does not have that right until she is 18. until then, even if a cop asks her if he can search her car, she is going to tell the cop to call her dad, Me, because she can't legally give consent to search with out my or her mom's permission. If the cell phone I will provide my daughter is ever taken from her, I will report the theft to the police and sue who ever took it. On my daughters first day of school I am going to the principal and letting them know that if my daughter is ever in trouble for anything I have instructed her to remain silent until I get there, and I will take off from work to be there.

Back on this topic:
Since there was no warrant to search the phone, any evidence found is in-admissible to use against the girl.
Secondly:
The teacher who viewed the photos was obviously looking for child porn and should be tried as a sex offender. Also this teacher passed the photos on so the teacher is also guilty of distributing child porn.

You wanted Zero tolerance, you got it ass hole.