Reply to post: Interesting

FBI's PRISM slurping is 'unconstitutional' – and America's secret spy court is OK with that

codejunky Silver badge


Bush wasnt considered too bright and started off a lot of this with good intentions. Obama is considered better yet with will and purpose he allows and expands all of this. Someone has already pointed out that Trump may win and considers that to be bad, and look what he will have in his hands (personally I dont care who becomes president, this is too much regardless).

Then there are the usual rantings against gun ownership which often extends beyond keeping them out of the hands of criminals to accusing everyone of insane paranoia. Yet they seem to be on the ball when they distrust the very gov breaking their constitutional rights put in place to stop a gov from breaking their constitutional rights.

the US government was required to retain any data that may be evidence of a crime.

He then argued that as a result, it didn't make sense for the US government to be required to retain information on a crime and then not be able to search that database.

Any data could be evidence of a crime. Anything without any exclusion until sufficient time has passed to be useless information.

Most interestingly was the first comment about businesses trying to protect the people from the gov, yet seems at odds with people supporting the govs attacking business to steal more money the gov is not entitled to.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020