Skip to comments.
Is FBI watching what you read?
http://www.zwire.com ^
| May 04, 2003
| By Dylan M. Archilla and Donald M. Kelly
Posted on 05/31/2003 12:14:56 PM PDT by ATOMIC_PUNK
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
To: ATOMIC_PUNK
I didn't realize that you had a Constitutional right to privacy about the books you check out from a PUBLIC library. I mean, perhaps it would be a nice idea, but that does not mean it is in the Constitition.
I mean, it used to be common that your name stayed in the book, and someone could check it out a few years later and see, "Oh, look, my friend John Hoosits checked this book out five years ago. Isn't that neat."
2
posted on
05/31/2003 12:29:24 PM PDT
by
Montfort
To: Montfort
Before you go on, you might want to check which of the following is true:
a) The Constitution enumerates your rights.
b) The Constitution enumerates the powers of the federal government, and anything not explicitly authorized by the Constitution is a right/power retained by states and individuals.
3
posted on
05/31/2003 12:34:51 PM PDT
by
eno_
To: Montfort
The legal issue boils down not to the patron's rights, but because the records are the records of the library, it is the right of that institution that are in question.
The fourth amendment protects the library from having to fork over its records without a warrant, issued on probable cause.
To: ATOMIC_PUNK
Note to self: Return "Catcher In The Rye" and tear up library card.
5
posted on
05/31/2003 12:36:31 PM PDT
by
Eric Esot
To: ATOMIC_PUNK
Big deal. Typical left wing swill. Oinking and snorting over library books but no concern over the Feds telling us what size toilet bowl we must have in our house, the IRS going into bank accounts and every kid in America forced to attend government school if parents don't have the ability to get them out. This is all cover any ways. What the left hates about the Patriot Act is the CIA and FBI can now share information and see just who is paying for those trips "activists" take to North Korea, Libya, Cuba and other socialist paradises. Democrats gutted our intelligence agences in the 1970s because the New Left, which had just moved into Congress, had been funded and run by the Soviets. They feared exposure. And they still do.
6
posted on
05/31/2003 12:36:44 PM PDT
by
DPB101
(Support H.R. 1305 to cut the Federal tax on beer in half)
To: ATOMIC_PUNK
The letter also urged the congressman to "co-sponsor the Freedom to Read Protection Act introduced recently by Congressman Bernie Sanders of Vermont."
Hey, Bernie Sanders has done something worthwhile!
7
posted on
05/31/2003 12:42:24 PM PDT
by
aruanan
To: DPB101
"Big deal. Typical left wing swill........."
And add to that, the fact that volume at libraries is way down, since the advent of the internet.
Forget libraries!
What we ALL are reading on the internet, is CONSTANTLY being monitored for keywords, which trip deeper inquiries into our lives.
8
posted on
05/31/2003 12:46:30 PM PDT
by
spoiler2
To: ATOMIC_PUNK
"Despite the dire predictions of some extremist groups, the Patriot Act has not eroded the civil liberties that we hold dear as Americans.Under the Patriot act, wouldn't it be illegal to tell us if it had? Or maybe it's also illegal to tell us it's illegal to tell us it's illegal?
9
posted on
05/31/2003 12:47:45 PM PDT
by
templar
To: spoiler2
Forget libraries! Pretty much so. My library is doing a good job on new books. Goldberg, Coulter, Savage, Hannity, Liddy, Charon and others are so popular the system buys dozens of copies of each new conservative titles.
But history and older books? Forget about it. Wanted to read some early Macolm Muggeridge and the system only had two books by him. One was "missing." Looking at the history section, would would think the Soviet Union was a footnote in history. Books on Nazis, Nixon and the evil CIA (and FBI) fill the shelves.
10
posted on
05/31/2003 1:04:57 PM PDT
by
DPB101
(Support H.R. 1305 to cut the Federal tax on beer in half)
To: ATOMIC_PUNK
Of course big brother is watching. Never do anything online, encrypted or not, that you wouldn't want published on the front page of your hometown newspaper.
To: ATOMIC_PUNK
I don't see library records could never be the legitimate subject of a criminal investigation. It would just be lovely if some case could be solved by determining when somebody was in a library to check out a book but the police were unable to determine that because these self-important boobs are purposefully keeping incomplete records.
12
posted on
05/31/2003 1:22:16 PM PDT
by
MattAMiller
(Iraq was liberated in my name, how about yours?)
To: ATOMIC_PUNK
The national association of librarians have decided that our elected government is a more dangerous enemy than the terrorists who plan to kill us all.
These same librarians fight equally hard to make pornography available to children in public-paid-for libraries, despite the objections of parents.
13
posted on
05/31/2003 1:22:57 PM PDT
by
WaterDragon
(America the beautiful, I love this nation of immigrants.)
To: John Beresford Tipton
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and siezures shall not be violated ...
I think one can argue that your library records, as say your banking records, are "effects" within the meaning of the 4th Amendment and thus not just a "library" issue but that of the patrons as well.
14
posted on
05/31/2003 1:25:57 PM PDT
by
Tunehead54
(Support Our Troops! Screw France.)
To: Righter-than-Rush
Of course big brother is watching. Never do anything online, encrypted or not, that you wouldn't want published on the front page of your hometown newspaper.
Uh oh! Rats - you should've warned us sooner! ;-)
15
posted on
05/31/2003 1:31:20 PM PDT
by
Tunehead54
(Support Our Troops! Screw France.)
To: Tunehead54
"as say your banking records"
That one has been extensively litigated and it is uniformly held that those records are the business records of the bank and not the depositor.
To: John Beresford Tipton
That is correct. Your bank records are not yours. They are open to the government and are, for all practicality, public record, should the government wish to check them out.
To: ATOMIC_PUNK
Libertarians are a hoot!:~)
18
posted on
05/31/2003 2:22:21 PM PDT
by
verity
To: Tunehead54
,EM>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and siezures shall not be violated ... I think one can argue that your library records, as say your banking records, are "effects" within the meaning of the 4th Amendment and thus not just a "library" issue but that of the patrons as well.
This is BS, and I think the word, PUBLIC, means just that, the library belongs to everyone and therefore the papers are a matter of public record.
To: org.whodat
No kidding! These entities don't hesitate to publish and embarass the reputations of patrons which are 'overdue' and refuse to pay the imposed fines -- well after any state Statute of Limitations would make any such unenforceable.
20
posted on
05/31/2003 2:40:09 PM PDT
by
Paul Ross
(From the State Looking Forward to Global Warming! Let's Drown France!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson