FORUMS > Group Activities Forum Rules

So, this came to mind as I started thinking about following/subscribing to someone's profile for forum posts on this website for easy reference and quick search results (I don't think thats available yet, I've asked though).

Given the possibility for justice in the worst case scenario, by the ability to see whom the person contacted and interacted with before a crime to determine suspects, what would you deam profile tracking according to your rights?

The U. S. Constitution contains no express right to privacy. The Bill of Rights, however, reflects the concern of James Madison and other framers for protecting specific aspects of privacy, such as the privacy of beliefs (1st Amendment), privacy of the home against demands that it be used to house soldiers (3rd Amendment), privacy of the person and possessions as against unreasonable searches (4th Amendment), and the 5th Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, which provides protection for the privacy of personal information. In addition, the Ninth Amendment states that the "enumeration of certain rights" in the Bill of Rights "shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." The meaning of the Ninth Amendment is elusive, but some persons (including Justice Goldberg in his Griswold concurrence) have interpreted the Ninth Amendment as justification for broadly reading the Bill of Rights to protect privacy in ways not specifically provided in the first eight amendments.

I don't believe your question directly correlates with the hindrance of a specific "constitutional right," Therefore in my opinion the police have the same authority to profile track as they do to pull bank statements or credit reports. Although some would argue that the aforementioned methods are indeed in violation of their right to privacy.

Whether its right or not has always been up to the people.

Not exactly on topic but apropos, the "who's viewed me" feature of this site I've always found interesting and disturbing. On the one hand useful in some ways, but creepy when you notice repetitive patterns of who is viewing you over and over without contacting you. I'm always extremely careful to not double-view profiles for this reason.

HeyJude saidThe U. S. Constitution contains no express right to privacy. The Bill of Rights, however, reflects the concern of James Madison and other framers for protecting specific aspects of privacy, such as the privacy of beliefs (1st Amendment), privacy of the home against demands that it be used to house soldiers (3rd Amendment), privacy of the person and possessions as against unreasonable searches (4th Amendment), and the 5th Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, which provides protection for the privacy of personal information. In addition, the Ninth Amendment states that the "enumeration of certain rights" in the Bill of Rights "shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." The meaning of the Ninth Amendment is elusive, but some persons (including Justice Goldberg in his Griswold concurrence) have interpreted the Ninth Amendment as justification for broadly reading the Bill of Rights to protect privacy in ways not specifically provided in the first eight amendments.

I don't believe your question directly correlates with the hindrance of a specific "constitutional right," Therefore in my opinion the police have the same authority to profile track as they do to pull bank statements or credit reports. Although some would argue that the aforementioned methods are indeed in violation of their right to privacy.

Whether its right or not has always been up to the people.

I heard somewhere in an article/e-book about Biometrics that the use of recognition systems was under debate for a while because of some sort of privacy right.

What you wrote seems somewhat shy. You didn't really state your opinion, just what you see as facts.

My view is that the police are entitled to have the authority for profile trackers.

CreaseHem said

HeyJude saidThe U. S. Constitution contains no express right to privacy. The Bill of Rights, however, reflects the concern of James Madison and other framers for protecting specific aspects of privacy, such as the privacy of beliefs (1st Amendment), privacy of the home against demands that it be used to house soldiers (3rd Amendment), privacy of the person and possessions as against unreasonable searches (4th Amendment), and the 5th Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, which provides protection for the privacy of personal information. In addition, the Ninth Amendment states that the "enumeration of certain rights" in the Bill of Rights "shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." The meaning of the Ninth Amendment is elusive, but some persons (including Justice Goldberg in his Griswold concurrence) have interpreted the Ninth Amendment as justification for broadly reading the Bill of Rights to protect privacy in ways not specifically provided in the first eight amendments.

I don't believe your question directly correlates with the hindrance of a specific "constitutional right," Therefore in my opinion the police have the same authority to profile track as they do to pull bank statements or credit reports. Although some would argue that the aforementioned methods are indeed in violation of their right to privacy.

Whether its right or not has always been up to the people.

I heard somewhere in an article/e-book about Biometrics that the use of recognition systems was under debate for a while because of some sort of privacy right.

What you wrote seems somewhat shy. You didn't really state your opinion, just what you see as facts.

My view is that the police are entitled to have the authority for profile trackers.

"Therefore in my opinion the police have the same authority to profile track as they do to pull bank statements or credit reports."

I'm fairly certain that i stated my opinion. And you are correct, it was an opinion based on facts. A clever idea don't you think?

Ciarsolo7 saidNot exactly on topic but apropos, the "who's viewed me" feature of this site I've always found interesting and disturbing. On the one hand useful in some ways, but creepy when you notice repetitive patterns of who is viewing you over and over without contacting you. I'm always extremely careful to not double-view profiles for this reason.

Oh, okay, so I'm busted. I'm not stalking you.


Not really.



Honest.

You sly elf, you.

CreaseHem saidSo, this came to mind as I started thinking about following/subscribing to someone's profile for forum posts on this website for easy reference and quick search results (I don't think thats available yet, I've asked though).

Given the possibility for justice in the worst case scenario, by the ability to see whom the person contacted and interacted with before a crime to determine suspects, what would you deam profile tracking according to your rights?

Yeah, like privacy "rights" even exist in this day and age. As Scott McNealy, former CEO of Sun once famously said:

"Privacy is dead, get over it."

Technology is the enemy of privacy. And we're willingly giving it all away...