Second U.S. Judge Blocks 'Do-Not-Call' List

Fox News ^ | http://www.foxnews.com/

[Hotdog]

War of the laws?...whats next?

[Post Toasties]

Solicitation is not freedom of speech - if it were, then panhandlers couldn't be restricted from begging anywhere they please.

[Post Toasties]

It's not 'free speech'. They're being paid to harass us:)

[HAL9000]

Billy "Bell" Tauzin supports the Do-Not-Call list.

I saw that. Big surprise.

But who benefits from the judge blocking the Do-Not-Call list - besides the telemarketers themselves?

[Post Toasties]

Except when you turn CNN off, it stays off. People should have the option of doing the same wrt cold callers who are not exercising any right of free speech by soliciting anyway.

[Squantos]

Anyone know his phone numbers to see how he likes the crap.....?;o)

Stay Safe !

[Fledermaus]

The right to call somebody on the phone, when that person says "don't call me" can't be found either.

And when that individual makes that known by either not answering the phone or blocking calls they don't want, I agree.

But when a small minority gets the federal government to make it illegal just because they don't like it, you have no real precedent or right to impose that on others.

Sounds like just another slide down the slippery slope to totalitarianism.

Let's try this one: did you know some people with large buildings get paid to paint giant signs on their roofs that can be seen from planes flying over? It that offends your view, do you want the federal government to ban them?

When I was in high school we'd drive a lot to Ft. Smith, AR...and if you went one way you would drive by a farm that had a giant silo painted like a Budweiser can. If that offends you and you don't want beer ads being seen do you think you have the right to have the federal government ban that just because it annoys you?

A lot of things annoy me, especially people trying to tell others what to do that aren't breaking any law. If we outlawed them all based on the minority view we'd be Europe and headed toward Islamic fundamentalism.

[hotpotato]

I received one from India a few days ago calling for a loan company about refinancing my house.

[Fledermaus]

Cable is not a necessity.

Neither is a telephone. Breathing, eating, drinking water, removing waste products from the body..those are necessities.

A phone is an advanced communication tool. Not a necessity. And don't give me the "but what if I'm having a heart attack and need to call an ambulance" or some other meaningless argument. The phone in that case is still just a wonderful tool that no one had before Bell invented the dang thing. Take that logic to conclusion and it would be a right or a necessity to have a nurse or doctor in every home in America.

[hotpotato]

Can you cite the part of the Constitution is particular that allows interference with a citizen's means of making a productive living? The bottom line is this. There would be no telemarketing at all if it didn't produce a decent income for a lot of citizens.

I recall some time ago, that the post office decided it would not be a means of transporting unsolicited pornography though there were those who could make a living at it.

[hotpotato]

By your logic an automobile is not a necessity and should be shared with anyone who decides to hitch a ride. A private home is not a necessity and should be open to anyone who would like to come through and use my non-necessary flushing toilet. Etc, etc....

[neutrino]

Keep up the fight, ml-lightning!

I despise telemarketers. I have a non-published number and an answering machine...so I don't get many such calls. Every now and then a machine (recording) calls, and I make a point to answer and talk a lot. It gives me considerable pleasure to think of the discomfiture of those who listen to the drivel I respond with!

Actually, I think the economy would be far better off if the telemarketing industry dried up and went away. Surely there is more productive work than annoying people.

[Ichneumon]

Besides, all Congress has to do is to pass the bill with language stating that the courts have no juridiction in the matter.

It doesn't work that way. Congress has no constitutionally delegated power to put a leash on the courts like that. If they did, it would be a loophole in the balance and separation of powers big enough to sail the Titanic through, and the Framers of the Constitution weren't that stupid.

[Ichneumon]

Sorry so slow but I'm on dial-up which coincidently get's interupted by telemarketers as well. I'm tired of redialing everytime.

If you put a "*70," in front of the number your computer dials to reach your internet service provider, in most city's phone systems that will temporarily turn off call-waiting for the duration of the call, and you won't get bumped off the computer when someone tries to phone you. Instead they'll just get a busy signal until you terminate the computer connection and free up your phone line.

[Fledermaus]

That's ridiculous...who said anything about sharing anything?

What a totally insane comparison to think allowing my phone to ring implies anyone could move into my home. The difference is so far apart you'd need warp speed to get there.

A phone isn't a right. My goodness, we are only about 40 years ahead of party lines. No privacy there.

What's next? Giving the death penalty to annoying idiots that can't dial the correct number and call you by accident (usually twice because most idiots can't bear to think they dialed the wrong number). How about a public thrashing for a prank call that calls at "dinner time".

And what exactly is "dinner time"? Do you now want the federal government to define that?

But you guys are correct, let's ban all forms of annoying advertising...get it out of our mailboxes, e-mails, pop-ups, telephones, billboards, magazines, newspapers, tv stations, radio programs, those blue road signs on the interstates (I'm so annoyed when Shell is on both the "Gas" and "Food" signs), high school annuals, sports programs you buy at the event, signs at concerts, blah, blah, blah.

And while we are at it I'm sick of product placements in movies. Ban them now!

Yeah, give the federal government even more power over free enterprise. They say politicans, pollsters and "charities" won't be on "THE LIST". Right.

How long before the minority whiners start banning charities they don't like? "Okay, the Lukemia Society I'll let through but not the Boy Scouts because we don't like their stance on homosexuals"...or "you can call if you raise money for AIDS research but not if you are the Salvation Army because your religious nature annoys and offends some"?

This BS is getting into "city tells eight year old she can't have a lemonade stand without a permit" territory.

How about this one...ban bumper stickers that have ads on them. I get real annoyed following the "Herbalife" guy.

Or better yet, let's just start beating up Avon Ladies.

[hotpotato]

TV advertising pays for my use of free TV programming. If I don't want to see advertising, I PAY for programming WITHOUT commercials. I PAY for my phone service and pay MORE by purchasing services like privacy manager and caller ID and telezapper to PREVENT telemarketers though they do everything possible to get around my methods of avoiding them.

I know I'm spinning my wheels so I have nothing more to add to this. I find your illogical argument in favor of telemarketers and against my right to privacy suspect.

[SevenDaysInMay]

Any Constitutional claim to make commercial phone calls to homes of people who actively sign up to prevent it is so spurious that judges who so rule must be impeached.

We must retake our government one or three judges at a time.

We consent to our RATIFIED Constitutional Republic. These blackrobes gavel this tryanny of their own making.

We the People must show blackrobes our contempt of court and their last federal paycheck.

[InfraRed]

But you guys are correct, let's ban all forms of annoying advertising... get it out of our mailboxes, e-mails, pop-ups, telephones,

The sooner, the better! Notice the common thread which links all these different forms of media -- private property. The pop-ups may be a gray area, but they are similar to forcing a person's television to change channels without his permission. Keep your advertising inside the window or channel which I have opened for your content. You have no Constitutionally protected right to tresspass on, or hijack, someone else's private property against their will.

billboards, magazines, newspapers, tv stations, radio programs, those blue road signs on the interstates (I'm so annoyed when Shell is on both the "Gas" and "Food" signs), high school annuals, sports programs you buy at the event, signs at concerts, blah, blah, blah.

These are either public places, or the advertising space has been authorized by the property owner.

Do I have the right to erect billboards in your living room? Perhaps some flashy neon signs and ice-cream-truck music in your bedroom? What about my freedom of speech?