S. 1080 the Cooper Davis Act

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.

Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

pmbug

Your Host
Administrator
Benefactor
Messages
14,605
Reaction score
4,627
Points
268
Location
Texas
United-States
EFF, the ACLU, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers joined a coalition that sent two letters to the Senate Judiciary Committee to oppose S. 1080, the Cooper Davis Act. The letters point out the privacy, speech, and criminal justice problems with the bill.

The bill would require private messaging services, social media companies, and even cloud providers to report their users to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) if they find out about certain illegal drug sales.

Even with the proposed amendments, S. 1080 would weaken an already insufficient privacy law and would provide a roadmap for more sweeping and overbroad carveouts. Its vague requirements and criminal penalties would result in companies over-reporting users to the DEA for innocent, protected speech. History shows it may also encourage companies to engage in dragnet scanning of user communications, which would result in even more errors and sweep up the same voices Congress is trying to protect.

Rather than addressing a pressing health crisis caused by fentanyl overdoses, this bill does an end run around the Fourth Amendment by requesting user information from online services in the form of mandatory reporting and voluntary disclosures. ...


Operation Mindcrime goes on
 
Anyone supporting such an unConstitutional abomination as this, is an ignorant fool.
....and supporting it should be seen as a violation of the oath of office they took to protect preserve and defend the Constitution from people like themselves.
....but that's what ya get when you quit teaching about the DOI and Constitution in school and more importantly, what they were written to prevent.

You get what we got right now. Ie: a populace that ignorantly elects people who see it as their job to defeat the Constitutional limitations on government power.



Any idea who sponsored the bill?
...and who supports it?
 
They start reporting that kind of stuff they'll start speaking in code... like pizza fer instance....
 
Back
Top Bottom