U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement

[Scorpio]

OK, I see how it is. As I previously addressed, there is a difference between what is right and what happens in practice. It seems that you are willing to accept as right and proper that the law is whatever it is determined to be by a group of corrupt judges deliberately misinterpreting perfectly clear law.

If the law was "perfectly clear," there would be no need for the judicial branch. It is quite arrogant to assume that your view is the proper view, and that anything else is "corrupt" or "misinterpretation." Your disagreement does not equal corruption on the other party's part. The word "reasonable" was put into the 4th amendment for a reason.

As for 'Godwin's law', you are buying into the traditional leftist tactic of ridiculing anything you cannot counter with reason. Similarities with Nazism are as they are. If the shoe fits, wear it. I, for one, will not ignore them just because someone has arbitrarily deemed such comparison not politically correct/unrefined/uncultured. If the similarity exists, it exists. Simple as that.

I'm not ridiculing anything, simply pointing out the hyperbole that inevitably makes its way into threads when politics is the subject. I was unaware that the Nazis started out with license plate readers and mail photography, but I'll be on the lookout for a Panzer division in my front yard from now on, I suppose.

I find it fairly humorous that one side always whines about the other side using ridicule instead of reason. This whining is usually followed by taunts of "libtard" and insistence that one side is evil and trying to "destory 'Murica."

Since you apparently don't get it, surveillance is the first step toward controlling a population. Since you find no problem with any of this, please offer a sane explanation of why the government would need to invest the effort of spying on most everyone, the overwhelming majority of which have no criminal inclination whatsoever. It has been my observation, both directly and in the context of history that people don't invest effort without a reason for doing so.

Unzipping my pants is also the first step towards rape, but that doesn't mean I'm not just getting undressed to take a shower or go to bed. There are legitimate purposes for data collection which, if done correctly, are perfectly legal and do not fall within the scope of search and seizure. I consider the photography of mail to be one of these. It's the outside of an envelope or package, NOT the contents. Much ado about nothing.

 

[BigMatt]

It's the outside of an envelope or package, NOT the contents. Much ado about nothing.

If it is nothing, then why does the government spend millions (I am being generous) every year to accomplish it?

 

[level.eleven]

Folks who have firearms related media and products delivered to their house. Folks like you. Sentiments could easily change. What about your USPS package from the Dawkins Foundation? Santorum is governor now. Come on Denny, you understand the dangers of metadata collection.

 

[Scorpio]

If it is nothing, then why does the government spend millions (I am being generous) every year to accomplish it?

I'm not saying that it costs nothing. I'm saying that it's nothing to me. I am not worried about it, I mean. The amount of money the government blows on it has nothing to do with it. There are less important things that the government spends far more money on. Do you honestly think that the government considers how important something is before they blow money on it? Not too long ago, they insisted on blowing millions on new tanks that the Army insisted that they do not need. If the Army doesn't need them, how important are they?

 

[Scorpio]

Folks who have firearms related media and products delivered to their house. Folks like you. Sentiments could easily change. What about your USPS package from the Dawkins Foundation? Santorum is governor now. Come on Denny, you understand the dangers of metadata collection.

What can the government learn from metadata collection that they cannot learn by logging on to a public forum such as this one?

 

[Denny347]

Folks who have firearms related media and products delivered to their house. Folks like you. Sentiments could easily change. What about your USPS package from the Dawkins Foundation? Santorum is governor now. Come on Denny, you understand the dangers of metadata collection.

My UPS man knows more about my personal life than that just by all the packages he has delivered to me over the years. Ammo, guns, car parts, etc. Who I am sending packages to and who I am receiving them from is NOT private. IF it was, I sure as hell would not write it is HUGE black letters on the outside of the package. I guess I don't understand the usefulness of such information. So what if a "Santorum" personality sees my package is from Richard Dawkins himself? Then what? What could be done to me based on that minute amount of information? Nothing. I still don't see how people are surprised that the same entity you voluntarily hand over your package to records the very information you want them to see. It's written on the outside of the package. ANYONE in legal proximity of that package could record the very same information. There is little to no expectation of privacy on the outside of a package/letter. There is no expectation of privacy on any area a person can view if seen from an area they are legally allowed to be.

 

[Scorpio]

There is no expectation of privacy on any area a person can view if seen from an area they are legally allowed to be.

Sums it up quite nicely. It's the same principle that allows the recording of anything viewed from a public place.

 

[level.eleven]

Sums it up quite nicely. It's the same principle that allows the recording of anything viewed from a public place.

The Telcos have already signed the immunity agreements.

 

[pitbulld45]

They must keep mine. I have fought for a year now to get my mail to my new address.

 

[rambone]

Is this good governance? Is it right that the Feds impose a legal monopoly on First Class Mail and then use their monopoly to database our correspondence? Is it right that this databased information can be handed out without a warrant?

Is this a worthwhile expenditure, considering the USPS is billions of dollars over-budget annually?

Post Office Loses $1.3 Billion in First Quarter

Post Office Loses $1.9 Billion in Second Quarter

 

[IndyDave1776]

If the law was "perfectly clear," there would be no need for the judicial branch. It is quite arrogant to assume that your view is the proper view, and that anything else is "corrupt" or "misinterpretation." Your disagreement does not equal corruption on the other party's part. The word "reasonable" was put into the 4th amendment for a reason.



I'm not ridiculing anything, simply pointing out the hyperbole that inevitably makes its way into threads when politics is the subject. I was unaware that the Nazis started out with license plate readers and mail photography, but I'll be on the lookout for a Panzer division in my front yard from now on, I suppose.

You are being deliberately obtuse. The point at issue is the basic principle that surveillance to the extent of eliminating any significant amount of personal privacy is the first critical step. The specific methods are irrelevant, your attempt at derailing the point notwithstanding.

I find it fairly humorous that one side always whines about the other side using ridicule instead of reason. This whining is usually followed by taunts of "libtard" and insistence that one side is evil and trying to "destory 'Murica."

I can't think of a single historic example of intense internal surveillance not leading to an assault on the rights of the citizens of the nation where it happened. Given your level of complacency, one wonders if you really don't get it, have something to gain from not getting it, or you believe you are immune from the ill effects of this trend either by formal or informal connections or else by subscribing to the 'nothing to hide' mentality. In the latter case, I would advise you to remember that you may well be doing things today that will be illegal tomorrow--forcing you to either change to conform, not conform and deal with the potential consequences, and in either case kick yourself in the rear for the position you are taking today.

Unzipping my pants is also the first step towards rape, but that doesn't mean I'm not just getting undressed to take a shower or go to bed. There are legitimate purposes for data collection which, if done correctly, are perfectly legal and do not fall within the scope of search and seizure. I consider the photography of mail to be one of these. It's the outside of an envelope or package, NOT the contents. Much ado about nothing.


First, the government isn't going to **** itself if it doesn't record the information from our mail (unlike you and your zipper). Second, for what legitimate purpose to you suppose the government may be spying on us? If they can't stop a terrorist who was reported by his own family to be boarding a plane for the US for terroristic purposes, how in the universe do you think they are going to discern from spying on the mail who may be involved in the terrorism which has become the universal free pass for violating the rights of the citizens? Maybe you think that it is a good plan for the USPS to start selling data for marketing purposes to make up its shortfalls? I would also point out that there is a difference between general public observation and the mail at the level that the mail is in a box the violation of which is a federal offense unless it is in the hands of an authorized person or being processed on USPS equipment--again, by people we paid for a service that does not include actively spying on us.

.

 

[cobber]

Is this good governance? Is it right that the Feds impose a legal monopoly on First Class Mail and then use their monopoly to database our correspondence? Is it right that this databased information can be handed out without a warrant?

Is this a worthwhile expenditure, considering the USPS is billions of dollars over-budget annually?

Post Office Loses $1.3 Billion in First Quarter

Post Office Loses $1.9 Billion in Second Quarter

Apparently the USPS has a black budget we're not being told about.

This public/private argument no longer hunts. When the government shows itself capable of monitoring practically everything you do in 'public', and that it is actually collecting that information, the realm of the 'private' contracts to a tiny niche, with the overwhelming majority of one's actions being surveilled and collated in some database somewhere.

In the past the government lacked this ability, hence we found novels like 1984 implausible.

And what is the end of all of this activity by the government? Clearly they're not collecting it to stop incidents like the Boston Marathon bombing. Or deport illegal aliens (ie, persons actually breaking the law).

Do we really want to recreate a Stasi here in America, with a dossier on every citizen? My apologies to Stasi officers who are also INGO members.

 

[Destro]

Is this good governance? Is it right that the Feds impose a legal monopoly on First Class Mail and then use their monopoly to database our correspondence? Is it right that this databased information can be handed out without a warrant?

Is this a worthwhile expenditure, considering the USPS is billions of dollars over-budget annually?

Post Office Loses $1.3 Billion in First Quarter

Post Office Loses $1.9 Billion in Second Quarter

every time the post office tries to close a location/change delivery/do anyting else to turn a profit, congress stands in their way. You can't lay 100% of the blame on the post office.

 

[Destro]