No Call List
Jeff said:
You don't own the phone network... there's a pretty serious difference there.
I heard a great discussion about that last night on WRCT (Carnegie Mellon University's radio station). You also don't own the street leading to your house. In both cases, you don't own the CONDUIT...
Now, having said that, I agree that the Don't Call List should be applied evenly. Unfortunately, that probably IS where it's about to break down.
------------------
--Greg, aka Oat Boy
My page
"The safety word is 'banana'." -- Family Guy
*** This post was edited by GregLeg 9/27/2003 5:30:43 PM ***
rollergator said:
Tina, it's OK to hang up on a telemarketer....oh, wait....wrong Bill....nevermind...;)
Heh. Don't worry Gator, I will never hang up on you, unless you try to sell me magazines. :-)
I used to screen my calls too, and how many times has a person come home to find a blinking red light on their answering machine to only find out it's a telemarketer who's used up the space on you answering machine with...."Hello? Hello? May I speak to..." (this is after the long silence where you can hear other telemarketers in the background) and the one calling you doesn't realize she/he is talking to a machine. lol.
-Tina
------------------
Gimme speed, height, airtime and plenty of LAUNCH!!!
Long-distance companies would really hound us, and one day I got a call from one of them asking "May I speak to Mr. Chandler?" I said "Mr. Chandler is not here".
The lady said "Is this Mrs. Chandler?" I said "No, Mrs. Chandler is not here, this is his girlfriend and please don't tell anyone that you talked to me cause Mrs. Chandler doesn't know about our affair."
That long distance company never called us again. lol.
-Tina
------------------
Gimme speed, height, airtime and plenty of LAUNCH!!!
You can download the tone if you look around (it's less than a second), and put it on your answering machine or voicemail followed by your normal message. Auto-dialing systems "hear" the tone and "think" it's a disconnected number and remove it from their database. And you don't have to buy a stupid "Tele-Zapper." That's all that little box actually did.
Personally, I've never been bothered by telemarketers since getting caller ID. If it's unknown, I just don't answer.
------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?
And part of the so-called reasoning for this legislation was to end fraud. Now the scammers will call in the name of charity..........
2) Similarly, many areas ban door to door sales. Another legal precedent.
3) Personally, I would like anyone attempting to separate me from my money banned from calling. This would still allow politicians and others to call me to try to influence my vote, but not to solicite funds. They can speak, but they can't beg. Polsters could still call for legitimate polls. I do think that this would be a better way to set up this law.
4) Jeff: You say that you last 3 employers haven't had you home number. Maybe you gave them your cell phone, same difference. I don't buy that bull about sales can't call a cell phone number becasue you pay for incoming calls, so it costs you money. If their right to harass you is constitutionally guananteed, why should it costing you money matter? (And I could give you a lengthy argument on why calling my home phone costs me money.)
5) The constitution also contains an implied right to privacy as supported by the courts. The new law is an enforcement of that right to privacy.
2) Also not true. It would never stand in court. The closest thing a municipality can do is require registration of "transient vendors" as they're called. Every city in my area does it, and I was involved in the draft of our local ordinance.
4) Your definition of harassment is not valid for the purpose of legally testing these regulations under the law. If it were, my mother in law would most certainly be guilty and sent to jail.
5) Privacy case law has nothing to do with having a phone, as phones are not a basic, fundamental need. When the Constitution was framed they certainly didn't know anything about phones.
------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?
2Hostyl said:
I worked for a Radio market research company, and though we didnt sell anything, I ws still consider a "scumbag telemarketer".
Ooh! You mean the "hi, we're conducting research to tell the radio stations what you want to hear" people?
I LOVE that call!
Pennsylvania has our own do not call list, I signed up the first day. The Music Research company, however, I granted access to.
I like to think of myself personally responsible for the recent upsurgence in Violent Femmes songs.
Unfortunately for me, my wife's workplace has a phone network that shows up as "out of area" on my caller ID. Same as telemarketers. Most cell phones show up like that, too, until recently. That makes it hard to not answer all the time.
On another note, how can it be illegal to call cell phones and not home phones? So your battery will die? Who cares... maybe they're selling batteries.
I'm gonna have to agree with our webmaster on this one. I don't want any of them to call. Charities and politicians included. If I want to cure something, I know what it is. If you're so undecided as a voter that a prerecorded phone call is gonna sway your opinion, you shouldn't be voting anyway.
(edited to fix quote brackets, in case you care.)
------------------
I hope you know this will go down on your permanent record.
*** This post was edited by kpjb 10/2/2003 8:55:10 PM ***
------------------
". . . don't you know baby that life is a scream!" - Gordon Gano
Well this do not call list is all fine and dandy but what does it have to do with roller coasters? I thought this website was coasterbuzz not current-eventsbuzz.
------------------
Riding on top of the world with Cedar Point
And I am so an official member of Coaster Buzz now ^_^.
Although I don't ride coasters because I'm a big chicken, I can't wait to take pictures of every coaster ever.
I'll post some soon enough!
------------------
"Then flash'd the living lightning from her eyes, and screams of horror rend th' affrighted skies." -Alexander Pope
And "most of the laws in this country are not what the constitution says?" Please. That's nonsense. Any law that is even remotely controversial ends up getting tested in the courts, usually sooner than later.
While I'm generally a skeptic and somewhat disenchanted with our government, the notion that judges play politics is insulting to the very fabric of our legal system. They don't just wake up and say, "I'm gonna rule this way because I feel like it," they have to come up with legal justification in their decisions, and those court opinions are published. Read one, you might learn something.
------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?
they're charged with disturbing the peace
Exactly, Jeff.
As for judges playing politics, you have a point. But you also have to see my point as well. They're are many intelligent, well-respected people who say the same thing as me. Let's face it, there are many less "checks and balances" towards the judicial branch than the other two.
------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?
I would like to think that judges don't make law from the bench, but some do. What experience do I have. I'm only a law school grad that has tried a criminal case and appeared before close to a dozen judges for pre-trial hearing, pleadings, etc... I'm currently getting ready for the Colorado bar.
I've also had the privelege to sit at a dinner and speech by Justice Scalia in Cincinatti in 2002. His whole speach was about judicial activism and judges making law, not interpreting the constitutionality of laws. Now I do want to say that I am not a huge fan of Justice Scalia's, but I do respect him. He is far more intelligent than you or I. I just couldn't pass up an opportunity for a free kick butt meal, all the free booze I could handle in a formal setting and to see a well respected leader of our country.
One thing you must remember is that a lot of the judges that are ruling from the bench are in their for life. They aren't elected and can't be removed for their decisions in the courtroom. I believe most of these judges were well respected citizens, but now that they essentially have tenure some of them (both conservative and liberal) are trying to push through a political agenda. It's unfortunate, but I believe that it is true.
On the telemarketer thing, though. I agree with you Jeff. This is protected speech. The only restrictions on speech are time and place restrictions, such as can't say fire in a crowded theater, can't say bomb in the airport, fighting words, etc... These restrictions were placed for safety concerns, not because they are simply annoying.
Now I signed up for the list, but didn't know that loopholes that were going to be available in it. I don't like telemarketers either but the government cannot say that they are not allowed to call you but non-profits, political parties and any company or affiliate of that company that you've done business with in the last 18 months are allowed to harrass you. Either all of them or none of them. IMO there are only two solutions to the problem of telemarketers: pass a law that forbids any company, charity or political party from calling you are you as an individual need to invest in the technology that does solve this problem. When I had caller ID and another option that I can't recall, I never received these calls. So there are solutions, but it'll cost you a little bit. So it's up to you to decide if these calls annoy you to the tune of $8 a month. Right now I haven't received any calls that wouldn't have been allowed by the No Call List loopholes anyway, so I say it isn't worth that much for me.
What about the judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It's one thing to be wrong from time to time, but this court is overturned by the Supreme Court a surprisingly high percentage of the times their cases make it to the top. I belive it's over 50% of their cases get overturned with the current judges in the 9th Circuit.
It's not true that the 9th Circuit's decisions get overturned at a greater rate than any other circuit ... more get overturned, but that's a result of the fact that it's by far the largest district (caseload wise). Besides, over 50% of all cases get overturned by the Court (regardless of circuit), because the Court tends to choose cases it's suspect about to decide on (Cases that are heard, I mean).
Now I do want to say that I am not a huge fan of Justice Scalia's, but I do respect him. He is far more intelligent than you or I
Maybe, but he's intellectually dishonest.
Anyway, topic:
This is protected speech. The only restrictions on speech are time and place restrictions, such as can't say fire in a crowded theater, can't say bomb in the airport, fighting words, etc...
Well, the Court has allowed content-based restrictions when it comes to commercial speech, but only in certain ways, which is what makes this so difficult, I suppose.
I still don't know if I think this is unconstitutional. On the one hand, cities can ban solicitors from approaching your home (Martin v. City of Struthers), but it would seem that, in order to ban phone calls into your home on a content basis, that form of commercial speech would somehow have to be more intrusive than non-commercial speech, or fundamentally different in another way.. I don't really see how that's the case, so I suppose that I do think the DNC list is unconstitutional.
*** This post was edited by mrk468zz 10/4/2003 9:55:37 AM ***
In combatting those that do not respect your wishes to be taken off the list, I have found the words: "Let me talk to your supervisor" to be generally helpful. Or do as a few friends of mine have done and start spouting off on a particular issue in your life until THEY hangup.
------------------
I am not who you think I am.
Martin v. Struthers is an interesting read, and contrary to your statement, it prohibits a ban on door-to-door solicitation imposed by government, it ruled the Struthers ordinance unconstitutional. The decision is more than 60 years old now, but how weird is it in the context of our discussion that the opinion reads:
This or any similar regulation leaves the decision as to whether distributers of literature may lawfully call at a home where it belongs -- with the homeowner himself. A city can punish those who call at a home in defiance of the previously expressed will of the occupant and, in addition, can by identification devices control the abuse of the privilege by criminals posing as canvassers.
I don't know if anything similar has come up in the courts since, but I would interpret this as saying, at the time, that a "do not call list" is a perfectly valid way to restrict this communication. The medium has changed, but the ideas aren't that different.
If I were drafting legislation, I would have to change the list to make it so people signing up could decide which types of calls they do not want to receive. Or, ban the calls entirely. Either way it would eliminate the concern that it restricts one type of speech and not another.
------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?
------------------
www.timmyfury.com
www.playskull.com
You must be logged in to post
