Where would you define the borders to be for an individual’s right to privacy at home, on the net, and in public?

Where would you define the borders to be for an individual's right to privacy at home, on the net, and in public?

What? If that’s the impression you got then it wasn’t what I was saying. They have the power to investigate you if you give them probably cause to. Whether that probably cause is misapplied is up to the courts to decide, but there are certain provisions. You don’t have a right to absolute privacy anywhere you go. Why? Because it’s not reasonable to assume that you do. In a public park there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy, hence you don’t have a right to privacy. In your home, that’s another matter. But conversely, just because you’re in your home doesn’t mean that under any circumstance your right to privacy still stands. If you’re suspected of criminal activity and there’s evidence supporting such activity, then reasonable expectation doesn’t come into it. However, they still would need a warrant because the right that you still have is the right to due process. With regards to licensing, it’s completely up to the state how they wish to hand them out and what the conditions of that contract are. If you wish to drive on public roads, you relinquish certain rights. Police officers, who are tasked with road safety, are completely within their jurisdiction enforcing the contract signed between you and the state for the privilege of driving. But that’s entirely dependent on whether or not that’s actually part of the contract. That’s what I’m saying. If the state requires from you and if you find that an adequate trade off for the ability to drive, then you’ve given up your right to privacy in that circumstance.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.