Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Second U.S. Judge Blocks 'Do-Not-Call' List
Fox News ^ | http://www.foxnews.com/

Posted on 09/25/2003 4:10:17 PM PDT by Hotdog

War of the laws?...whats next?


TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: donotcalllist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 401-408 next last
To: elfman2
It’s a signal, not an “alarm”, and you are not “required” to do anything.

It's a signal much like your electronic alarm clock which requires an amplifier to produce sound. And yes the government is authorized to limit solicitors. How many 3rd shift telemarketing jobs have you heard of?

341 posted on 09/26/2003 11:04:57 AM PDT by m1-lightning (A charge to keep I have, a God to glorify, a never-dying soul to save, and fit it for the sky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies]

To: elfman2
"CNN, CBS and telemarketers choose devices that enable their communications accross public property "

A company PBX is a private system. When you connect your phone to Bell South , it’s on a public system (or at least a Bell South system). You knew that when you connected it.

My phone is connected to a phone compnay of some unknown ownership to me. That ownership is irrelevant to my point. My point is that the phone company leases public land to send me phone transmissions AND that these phone transmissions are specifically segmented to me AND I don't want them. Public property is never so easily segmented as it is with specific phone messages that are segmented accross it on phone lines. Who else would have a better right to control such a thing?

Telemarketing is not “harassment”. It’s solicitation. You just find it annoying.

My argument doesn't need for it to reach the level of harrassment and BTW some telemarketing DOES reach that level as would be judged by "a resonable person" -- IMO.

342 posted on 09/26/2003 11:07:01 AM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: hotpotato
I agree
343 posted on 09/26/2003 11:07:31 AM PDT by m1-lightning (A charge to keep I have, a God to glorify, a never-dying soul to save, and fit it for the sky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]

To: m1-lightning; Held_to_Ransom
m1, I just realized the first part of this was Ransom's comments and should have directed my post to that poster (reference my response #339).
344 posted on 09/26/2003 11:07:51 AM PDT by hotpotato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
One big flat tax instead of 1,500 different user's fees and taxes that don't even go to the programs they are intended for. It's just my opinion and curiosity, and I wish not to change the subject here.
345 posted on 09/26/2003 11:10:34 AM PDT by m1-lightning (A charge to keep I have, a God to glorify, a never-dying soul to save, and fit it for the sky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

Comment #346 Removed by Moderator

To: m1-lightning
Out of curiosity, since you and I agree on property rights over "free market rights", would you agree with me that property taxes are like paying rent to the government for land which they don't own, hence being unconstitutional in my view?

General property taxes not tied to any specific usage of government service would be unfair. It may be unconstitutional -- I haven't thought about it yet.

347 posted on 09/26/2003 11:13:12 AM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: hotpotato

348 posted on 09/26/2003 11:13:41 AM PDT by m1-lightning (A charge to keep I have, a God to glorify, a never-dying soul to save, and fit it for the sky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: Motherbear
Free speech? So I have to get a protective order to keep AT&T from harrassing me?

If you agree to a 'terms of service' when signing up with their program, you might. Otherwise all other solicitation not binded in a terms of service with your phone company are not considered legally protected and may be legislated by the state or federal government.

349 posted on 09/26/2003 11:16:33 AM PDT by m1-lightning (A charge to keep I have, a God to glorify, a never-dying soul to save, and fit it for the sky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies]

To: Hotdog
As usual, Neal Boortz pegs it in today's Nealz Nuze:
Can you believe it? Another federal judge has stepped in to try to kill the national do not call list for telephone solicitors. He says that the list is a violation of our free speech rights. So... now free speech means that you have the right to call anyone you want and harass them at their home at a time of your choosing?
If a do not call list is a violation of this cherished right, then what about unlisted phone numbers? Hey, I want to call Barbra Streisand and tell her what I think of her mindless politics .. but her number is unlisted. Those unlisted phone numbers are a violation of my free speech rights ... and I want them outlawed! And what about those phones that reject calls from people who have their phone number blocked to people with caller ID? Are you telling me that I have to identify myself in order to have my free speech rights? Just where is THAT set forth in our Constitution?

350 posted on 09/26/2003 11:17:58 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elfman2
You chose to installed devises that enables their communication, and you’re unhappy that it doesn’t discriminate to your satisfaction.

By this inane "logic", if I install a lock on my door and a burglar gets in anyway by picking the lock, the law should not give me any recourse.

351 posted on 09/26/2003 11:22:38 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: elfman2
It the Government chooses to do so, even at your request, it’s a restriction on the telemarketer’s right to speak freely in public.

And now you've invented a legal doctrine that makes restraining orders un-Consitutional.

On what planet did you go to law school?

352 posted on 09/26/2003 11:25:03 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
Wow, Boortz really nailed this one. If you believe telemarketers have a free-speech right to call anyone with a telephone, then you must also believe that call-blocking services are unconstitutional, a violation of one's free speech; and yet that is the only solution they have put forth to people like me -- purchase a service that will block unsoliticed calls.
353 posted on 09/26/2003 11:25:49 AM PDT by kevao (Fuques France!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: m1-lightning
"One big flat tax instead of 1,500 different user's fees and taxes"

That does make some sense. Both from an efficiency standpoint and from a "get a sense of how big the tax bite really is" standpoint. I'm not sure I agree on all user fees though. Some fees discourage excess usage and more accurately put the cost burden to the activity. Water bills should still reflect water but nothing else. Car tags should reflect the cost of the registration program but nothing else. etc, but nothing else.

354 posted on 09/26/2003 11:27:15 AM PDT by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
By this inane "logic", if I install a lock on my door and a burglar gets in anyway by picking the lock, the law should not give me any recourse.

Hey, you knew what you were getting into when you installed the lock.

355 posted on 09/26/2003 11:27:34 AM PDT by kevao (Fuques France!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: elfman2
If Bell South chooses to block communication, that’s their right. It the Government chooses to do so, even at your request, it’s a restriction on the telemarketer’s right to speak freely in public.

Question: If a private company can restrict a telemarketer's right to speak freely in public, does that right truly exist?

356 posted on 09/26/2003 11:31:24 AM PDT by kevao (Fuques France!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
True True True
357 posted on 09/26/2003 11:33:33 AM PDT by m1-lightning (A charge to keep I have, a God to glorify, a never-dying soul to save, and fit it for the sky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies]

To: m1-lightning
"It's a signal much like your electronic alarm clock which requires an amplifier to produce sound. "

A phone ring is also a signal much like the one that sets off a nuclear bomb, but that doesn’t mean it’s a detonator. You are attempting to abstract up to the general from the specific and back down again. A cow is a mammal, but that doesn’t make other mammals such as horses cows. A phone ring is not an alarm. An alarm communicates a specific danger. A signal communicates something much more general, in this case that someone wants to talk to you. You choose to respond or let the machine get it.

AFAIK, the market eliminates 3rd shift telemarketing jobs, but there may be regulations nevertheless. The government does a lot of things it’s technically not authorized to do. That doesn’t justify each new one.

I have a plumbing leak and an 11m/o to take care of today. I have to back out of this after answering the next guy. Good luck.

358 posted on 09/26/2003 11:39:25 AM PDT by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
Good article. And right on target.
359 posted on 09/26/2003 11:40:33 AM PDT by hotpotato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
"Who else would have a better right to control such a thing? "

The access point owners (phone company) that you sign up with. Also, it was you (I think) that brought up the claim that it was harassment.

I have a plumbing leak and an 11mo to take care of today. Got to go, good luck.

360 posted on 09/26/2003 11:43:15 AM PDT by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 401-408 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson