Domain: icx.net
Stories and comments across the archive that link to icx.net.
Comments · 5
-
Interesting article......though it would be interesting to know the volume that comes out of willful spammers (as opposed to zombie pcs) operating from throwaway ISP accounts, as opposed to people with pink contracts and truckloads of bandwidth.
Incidentally, this bit:
...a judge...complained that a man with a criminal record who landed in his courtroom was sending malicious e-mail. The harasser was complaining to the judge about such minutia as the fringe on the American flag hanging in his courtroom.was interesting to me. This sounds like the oft-repeated assertion that a US flag with a fringe in a courtroom means that you're under Admiralty law, not the law of the United States, and that anyone who appears before that court has lost most of their rights. Of course, They don't want you to know this...or that England still owns the US, or that there is a subtle yet vitally important difference between the United States and the United States of America that means you are 0wn3d by the government...
I tell you, there are worlds upon worlds of free entertainment out there on the Internet.
-
Re:Privacy my ass
GrandParent> How is driving on public roads a private thing?
Parent> Because we say so, and since we're the fuckin' voters, what we say goes.
Nonsense. You are ignoring Common Law.
Judges have repeately ruled citizens have the "Right to Travel"
Driver Licensing vs. the Right to Travel
"the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business, differs radically and obviously from that of one who makes the highway his place of business and uses it for private gain in the running of a stagecoach or omnibus. The former is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all, while the latter is special, unusual, and extraordinary." Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781. -
Re:He seems a dangerous driver (serious)> It's not a god-given right. It's a law-given privledge. I think people in the US seem to forget that driving is a privledge, not a right
Are you really that ignorant of the law?!
Right To Travel
Right to Travel: The Constitutional Case
Specifically
In the U.S., the right to travel is derived from the synthesis of several rights. This was quite well laid out in Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116 (1958) at 125-126.
"The right to travel is a part of the `liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values."
All LAW is CONTRACT. (Ask a lawyer if you don't believe me. They will very grudgingly admit it, because "Might does not make Right.")
Furthermore, I *know* it is a right, because I drive without a driver's license and have never gotten a ticket for "driving without a license" the few times I have been pulled over.
Lastly, where do you think the government gets it privileges from??
Does the government create people, or do people create the government?
> you have no right to make it even more risky by driving too fast.
Correct, freedom doesn't mean you have the right to be irresponsible!
--
I'm not the first to say "The fallacy of Science is that it rejects the Truth of the Subjective, but yet it relies on the Subjective to reach the Objective!"
Others have said it too... "I'm criticizing the notion that there is any single special method that all scientists use, which would warrant the label "the scientific method."
Dispelling Some Common Myths about Science -
Re:More then just technology
good point on the definitions. A few notes back though:
The CIA does not consider the US a democracy NOR a democratic republic. this , we are in fact a federal republic.
Democracy is actually a system of mob rule. This was one thing that even James Madison decried in the Federalist Papers.
I will say this, however, that lately the US is becoming more and more of a democracy when special interest groups with the most money (the biggest mob) bend the ears of the politicians.
You see, in a democracy, the rights of the individual are superceded by the rights of the larger group (the mob). What happens when the mob is made up of luddites? Computers and coffee machines become illegal and we are all out of work. In a republic, my right to work and make a living supercedes your personal beliefs on technology as long as it doesn't infringe on your right to hold that belief.
I know that's a bad example but it's the best that I could come up ATM. A democracy is a terribly unstable beast. The whims of the people are more fickle than the winds of the four corners.
I've attached some links at the bottom. Some of these come from religious websites but it makes a valid point none the less. Note that I don't endorse any of the religous links posted. I could care less. Thomas Jefferson said once (paraphrase) "If a man believes in god or does not, what does it matter to me? It neither picks my pocket or breaks my leg." Another of the links is to the Cato Institute (disclaimer: an organization which I wholly support)
Some Links:
1
2
3
4 -
Watch as....
this post's mod drops like a plane with an afghani pilot.
There are serious issues surrounding the legalities of a drivers license. There is a strong relationship to between the drivers license and the SSN (social securit number), the latter of which is not required of you to possess (but good luck trying to live without one).
It comes down to definitions. Words like "travel", "automobile", "motor vehicle", and amoung the most important, "driver". IANAL, but you have to understand that when you enter into the realm of law, you dont just have "general meanings" for words. They are each defined very strictly, and are often redefined in various sections so as not to have any confusion as to where or to whom the law applies.
"Motor Vehicle" is an important one. Definition in Title 18 USC 31 - "Motor vehicle" means every description or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, or passengers and property."
"Driver" is another one, definition from Bovier's Law Dictionary - "One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle..."
You'll notice that both of these definitions include mention of the thing in question (a Motor Vehicle or a Driver) involved in some form of commericial business. The argument exists, in what may people think as extremists circles, that licensing, by law, is only required for those who wish to use the public roads for commercial use.
So notice you are getting a "Driver's License" at the "Motor Vehicle Division", and you are not getting a "Traveler's License" at the "Automobile Division". Traveler and Automobile.. very different defintions on those 2 words than on the previous 2.
So you have "extremist" views and you have people who try to debunk them (cant find a legitimate link right now, but they most definitely exist). The difference seems to be one group is actively reading the laws and applying them (how dare they), and one group is saying "these guys are idiots, OF COURSE everyone has to have licenses, thats how we've done it for YEARS, so it MUST BE RIGHT!!!"
So again, there are lots of issues surrounding the driver's license. As one previous poster put it, if you dont like the requirements to get one, dont get one. But then life actually becomes hard, and no one wants life to be hard...
--- Check out this guy who lives a (semi)normal life without a Social Security Number.