Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

Nope.. spot on comparison

Posted on: November 28, 2017 at 18:34:33 CT
Spanky KU
Posts:
145946
Member For:
20.95 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
His BELIEF of what is private is not germane to the topic... Since 1979 (at least) it has been a FACT that there is ZERO expectation of privacy of any number you dial on your phone. ZERO!!

His OPINION notwithstanding, he would just look like a frigging moron to get up in court and claim he thought the numbers he dialed were private. He would be laughed out f court...just as he is laughed out of tigerboard.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

Supreme court cellphone case puts free speech...at risk - JeffB MU - 11/28 17:24:02
     Smith v. Maryland shows that the conviction will not be - Spanky KU - 11/28 17:36:35
          Those are the arguments of the plaintiff, correct? - DC Jayhawk KU - 11/28 18:48:01
          I entertain expectations of privacy in the numbers I dial - pickle MU - 11/28 18:08:13
               You would be wrong. Your expectations are ill placed - Spanky KU - 11/28 18:35:08
                    How am I wrong? (nm) - pickle MU - 11/28 20:17:56
                    His expectations are his expectations. - ummmm MU - 11/28 18:39:39
                         That would be a mistake on his part. The law works - Spanky KU - 11/28 18:57:04
                              What mistake am I making? (nm) - pickle MU - 11/28 20:18:28
                              What would be a mistake? I didn't note any actions on - ummmm MU - 11/28 19:09:44
          I entertain an actual expectation of privacy in the - ummmm MU - 11/28 17:44:54
               You should not have (at least since 1979) - Spanky KU - 11/28 17:59:44
                    That's weird. Why would my expectation of privacy be up to - ummmm MU - 11/28 18:04:30
                         If you were to claim you felt cooking meth in your front - Spanky KU - 11/28 18:07:51
                              I wouldn't personally expect privacy in that regard. - ummmm MU - 11/28 18:33:21
                              those cucumbers are special - FootballRefugee MU - 11/28 18:15:56
                              RE: If you were to claim you felt cooking meth in your front - mizzoumurfkc MU - 11/28 18:12:37
                                   Nope.. spot on comparison - Spanky KU - 11/28 18:34:33
                                        'there is ZERO expectation of privacy of any number you dial - JeffB MU - 11/28 23:09:15
                                        you're an idiot, and that's being kind (nm) - pickle MU - 11/28 20:17:28
                                        RE: Nope.. spot on comparison - mizzoumurfkc MU - 11/28 19:05:16
                                        Why even call it "expectation of privacy" then? - ummmm MU - 11/28 18:37:16
                                             Because that's what 'no expectation of privacy' means - Spanky KU - 11/28 19:01:48
                                                  Well, that post didn't even begin to address my - ummmm MU - 11/28 19:10:47
                              Stop trying to change subject (nm) - pickle MU - 11/28 18:09:11
          But it's not just the numbers being dialed, but movements - JeffB MU - 11/28 17:42:02
               I get that. I doubt there is any REASONABLE person - Spanky KU - 11/28 18:05:09
                    It is government monitoring of people's movements, who they - JeffB MU - 11/28 18:10:21




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard