The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2

[Sigz]

"Had Mr. Vilca actually molested a child," The New York Times notes, "he might well have received a lighter sentence."

[El Barto]

"Had Mr. Vilca actually molested a child," The New York Times notes, "he might well have received a lighter sentence."

That's fucked up.  At the same time,  the problem in this instance is with sentencing guidelines in general,  and not the silly "think of the children!" paranoia that caused this situation. 

[Super Dude]

So I was looking at the grid from that Political Compass Test, and I realized that while I know right authoritarian correlates with fascism and left authoritarian with socialism, I have no idea what the difference is between right and left libertarian, or if there's a more recognizable name for one or the other.

[chknptpie]

So I was looking at the grid from that Political Compass Test, and I realized that while I know right authoritarian correlates with fascism and left authoritarian with socialism, I have no idea what the difference is between right and left libertarian, or if there's a more recognizable name for one or the other.

Libertarian is such a large collection of believes its hard to say. I know there are some that are pro-choice, some that are pro-life... so it may just be the nature of the naming convention.

[antigoon]

So I was looking at the grid from that Political Compass Test, and I realized that while I know right authoritarian correlates with fascism and left authoritarian with socialism, I have no idea what the difference is between right and left libertarian, or if there's a more recognizable name for one or the other.

I'm trying to read up on it but I'm coming out somewhat confused. I think the gist of it is that they place a high value on social justice and equality, which they believe can be achieved through anticorporatist, free-market means.

[El Barto]

Oral arguments for United States v. Jones:  https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2011/2011_10_1259/argument

This is the case where the Supreme Court will determine that The Man doesn't need a search warrant to put a GPS tracker on your car.  I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet,  but I've been looking forward to hearing it. 

[antigoon]

Oh gosh; thanks for posting. Oyez does a nice job with these.

[El Barto]

Yeah,  I love listening to these when I walk in the evenings.  Looking forward to this one tonight. 

[Sigz]

This is the case where the Supreme Court will determine that The Man doesn't need a search warrant to put a GPS tracker on your car.

It's mindblowing that that's even a question.

[antigoon]

I actually thought Dreeben for the US did a much better job than Jones' counsel, although I shouldn't be surprised I guess; you don't just get to be a Deputy Solicitor General without some skills.

I'm concerned.

[Scheavo]

This is the case where the Supreme Court will determine that The Man doesn't need a search warrant to put a GPS tracker on your car.

It's mindblowing that that's even a question.

I agree, but at the same time, given the way you can get warrants, I don't really see why this matters a whole lot to the individual. If the police go an get a warrant to track me, I'm still not gonna know, right? I'd say the problem arises with technology; why doesn't someone create a device the scrambles gps monitoring devices like this? Or would that just fuck with everyone's cell phones?

[El Barto]

I actually thought Dreeben for the US did a much better job than Jones' counsel, although I shouldn't be surprised I guess; you don't just get to be a Deputy Solicitor General without some skills.

I'm concerned.

I haven't heard it yet,  but yeah,  Uncle Sammy tends to get some pretty brilliant guys to argue for him.  I don't recall any cases he's argued specifically,  but this fellow appears to have been arguing on The Man's behalf since '89. 

This is the case where the Supreme Court will determine that The Man doesn't need a search warrant to put a GPS tracker on your car.

It's mindblowing that that's even a question.

I agree, but at the same time, given the way you can get warrants, I don't really see why this matters a whole lot to the individual. If the police go an get a warrant to track me, I'm still not gonna know, right? I'd say the problem arises with technology; why doesn't someone create a device the scrambles gps monitoring devices like this? Or would that just fuck with everyone's cell phones?

At least there's some oversight, though.  Even if it's just the FISA court.  I recall one of the FISA justices actually demonstrating some conscience a while back.  Better than allowing Johnny to make all of the decisions.

[Super Dude]

Hey goon thanks for the blurb, but who's who in that? Or are libertarians fairly similar right or left?

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I wish livehard were here to help me out.

[antigoon]

The "they" are left libertarians. Although in my very limited reading I found it difficult to make a distinction between them and the "regular" libertarians.

[Super Dude]

OK thanks

[Scheavo]

This is the case where the Supreme Court will determine that The Man doesn't need a search warrant to put a GPS tracker on your car.

It's mindblowing that that's even a question.

I agree, but at the same time, given the way you can get warrants, I don't really see why this matters a whole lot to the individual. If the police go an get a warrant to track me, I'm still not gonna know, right? I'd say the problem arises with technology; why doesn't someone create a device the scrambles gps monitoring devices like this? Or would that just fuck with everyone's cell phones?

At least there's some oversight, though.  Even if it's just the FISA court.  I recall one of the FISA justices actually demonstrating some conscience a while back.  Better than allowing Johnny to make all of the decisions.

I guess my point was that the biggest threat to persona privacy isn't the government, but technology.

The fact that you actually recall a justice "demonstrating a conscience" means how rare that thing seems to be. If it makes a difference in like 1% of the cases, is it really all that different? I guess I just don't see the results of this being much more than legal mumbo jumbo, with little effect for most people.

[El Barto]

A few things struck me about U.S. v. Jones.

For one thing,  they never followed the path I hoped they would.  The best chance for them shooting this thing down was if they determined it was over-broad.  A couple of years ago, they said The Man couldn't fly around in pork-choppers scanning neighborhoods with infrared cameras looking for dope growers.  The rationale behind it was that picking up heat signatures could tell you a lot more than if they're growing pot.  Justice Bryer expressed concern that they could tell when he was using his Swedish sauna (rather than working).  It seems the same thing applies here.  A GPS device can tell when you visit the Asian massage parlor, for example.  It's always on and always reporting.  This goes well beyond the scope of the investigation.

Without following that avenue,  I see little chance that they'll shoot this thing down.  One possibility is that they overturn this guys conviction, but punt the larger issue.  They were very concerned about the trespass issue.  It's possible (though I wouldn't bet on it) that they conclude placing the device on his car was no-bueno,  but leave the actual tracking undecided.  Either way,  this case demonstrates once again how completely meaningless the concept of privacy has become.

What actually concerned me the most is their opinion that this is an issue that should be left up to the legislatures.  It seems to me that the 4th Amendment is actually there specifically to protect us from the intrusion of government,  so it seems quite a stretch to think that the government is going to step in here and castrate itself.  Their reasoning is that the people control the government,  and therefore it's safe to leave the safeguard up to us, via the legislature.  Of course we now know good and well that we have absolutely no control over the government.  The people who actually make GPS transmitters actually have more influence than we do.  Kind of a depressing situation, honestly.

In the end,  I suppose that the only way this can work itself out is for the surveillance situation to get so bad that people insist something be done about it.  Another entry on the list of reasons to rebel.  I don't see that happening in my lifetime.  At this point,  I think Americans will trade all the privacy in the world for a little added convenience.  Just another reason why things suck.

[Scheavo]

A GPS device can tell when you visit the Asian massage parlor, for example.  It's always on and always reporting.  This goes well beyond the scope of the investigation.

In the end,  I suppose that the only way this can work itself out is for the surveillance situation to get so bad that people insist something be done about it.  Another entry on the list of reasons to rebel.  I don't see that happening in my lifetime.  At this point,  I think Americans will trade all the privacy in the world for a little added convenience.  Just another reason why things suck.

Considering things like Facebook and cellphones, I'm not sure most people have any right to complain about their privacy being taken away anymore. It's like a whore complaining when she get's pregnant.

[El Barto]

A GPS device can tell when you visit the Asian massage parlor, for example.  It's always on and always reporting.  This goes well beyond the scope of the investigation.

In the end,  I suppose that the only way this can work itself out is for the surveillance situation to get so bad that people insist something be done about it.  Another entry on the list of reasons to rebel.  I don't see that happening in my lifetime.  At this point,  I think Americans will trade all the privacy in the world for a little added convenience.  Just another reason why things suck.

Considering things like Facebook and cellphones, I'm not sure most people have any right to complain about their privacy being taken away anymore. It's like a whore complaining when she get's pregnant.

I don't use Facebook, and I have GPS assist disabled in my phone.  I'm not voluntarily ceding my privacy like most people do, and as such,  it seem reasonable to expect that a court order should be required to track my phone. 

[Scheavo]

A GPS device can tell when you visit the Asian massage parlor, for example.  It's always on and always reporting.  This goes well beyond the scope of the investigation.

In the end,  I suppose that the only way this can work itself out is for the surveillance situation to get so bad that people insist something be done about it.  Another entry on the list of reasons to rebel.  I don't see that happening in my lifetime.  At this point,  I think Americans will trade all the privacy in the world for a little added convenience.  Just another reason why things suck.

Considering things like Facebook and cellphones, I'm not sure most people have any right to complain about their privacy being taken away anymore. It's like a whore complaining when she get's pregnant.

I don't use Facebook, and I have GPS assist disabled in my phone.  I'm not voluntarily ceding my privacy like most people do, and as such,  it seem reasonable to expect that a court order should be required to track my phone.

Well you aren't most people.

[Super Dude]

I can't remember if it's Nigerius Rex or WW that likes talking about American food policy, but lemme just leave this here...

https://notionscapital.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/congress-reaps-pizza-harvest/

Pizza = vegetable

[antigoon]

ksadfhlasdfjhasldfhgasdf'asd

In other farm news, Monsanto announced that Roundup-Ready Pizza Seeds will be available in time for spring planting, and February pizza crop futures rose at the Chicago Board of Trade after predictions of  increased Super Bowl party demand.

[Super Dude]

We need a 'take a bow' emote.

[El Barto]

That's a real hoot.  While I agree with the Republican's position that the federal government shouldn't be dictating what schools feed kids,  they're still absolutely wrong.  Setting aside the very sound (from a Republican point of view) argument that today's children are too fat to go off and get and get blown to bits in faraway deserts defending corporate profits,  it seems to me that the federales do have a right to dictate what lunch meals they're paying for.  The Republican stance should be that poor kids should buy their own,  rely on a kind-hearted public to support them, or fucking starve. 

And this has come up before under the administration of St. Reagan.  Ketchup as a vegetable

[antigoon]

I just gotta say, Barto, I appreciate the nicknames you give our recent presidents

[antigoon]

Does anybody actually like Ann Coulter?

[Scheavo]

She actually said most of the Republican candidates are a joke, first time I think I've ever agreed with her.

[Super Dude]

I saw this in someone's signature at another forum:



The Holocaust denial part...bleh.

[antigoon]

lol.

[antigoon]

Do we have a war thread? Thought this article was interesting. The US is trying to lift the UN ban on cluster bombs, apparently. 

https://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/22/us-pushing-un-cluster-bombs

[Scheavo]

I can't think of one damn good reason why anyone would fight for this kind of thing (but really, that goes for all warfare/hostile actions). In the end, if conventional style warfare broke out, I fully expect both sides to use the means at their disposal to achieve their ends.

Really, the fueling factor in the Cold War is still with us though, so I'm not sure we'll see much more than the Proxy war's we've seen the for past 60 year's. Nukes in the hands of terrorists organizations are bad, nukes in the hands of states of power is almost beneficial. You know if you use a nuke, you're going to probably get nuked if you're a state, and there's not much fucking defense you can offer. Who the fuck is going to want that? No one, especially the powerful rulers of a country who just love to have people worship them.

[Super Dude]

That Cold War mentality has been with us since the foundation of the Union, so that doesn't surprise me.

[Scheavo]

I don't see how that's possible? There weren't nukes then, there wasn't the panic over nukes, and their repercussions. that's what I meant to refer to.

[Super Dude]

Well sure, but the mentality was there, as in a Revolutionary War pt. 2 in which the British invade again, in which the British invade after weakening and dividing North and South, etc. I'll find the book I learned this from later.

[Scheavo]

Well sure, but the mentality was there, as in a Revolutionary War pt. 2 in which the British invade again, in which the British invade after weakening and dividing North and South, etc. I'll find the book I learned this from later.

Think we're talking about different aspects. I don't mean the mentality of American's as a whole, but specifically the mentality around Nuclear Weapons, the major major influence that had on the Cold War, and it's effects on worlds politics.

It's purely based upon weapons technology, as Russians face the same mentality, and notice how Pakistan and India haven't blown each other up (at least yet). Mutually assured destruction is a game changer.