> >The 3rd amendment argument is a losing argument. The purpose of that
> >amendment is to prevent repeating something that happened during the
> >Revolutionary War. It pertains to soldiers shacking up in civilian's
> >houses, not to a civilian law-enforcement organization hooking a
> computer
> >up to your ISP's network.
>
> Wrong. The 3rd amendment was about stopping the Government from
> shifting
> the cost of the Army from the Government to individual families. It was
> about not taking people's resources without representation and due
> process.
> It certainly applies in this case. Now whether some brain-dead Supreme
> Court agrees is a separate unrelated matter.
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the
consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed
by law.
Carnivore is not a soldier. Carnivore is a computer. It just doesn't
apply. Besides, even if the 3rd amendment did apply to Carnivore, it could
be legally employed anyway, "in a manner prescribed by law."
I'm not saying that I like Carnivore or even that it's legal. But the 3rd
amendment doesn't have anything to do with it whatsoever.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
