OT - No-Call list

General Woundwort · #1 July 10th, 2003, 09:37 PM

The offices of the telemarketers will burn with our avenging fire!

www.donotcall.gov

mottlee · #2 July 10th, 2003, 09:47 PM

Done! Did! Two Phones!

Mathias_Ice · #3 July 10th, 2003, 11:54 PM

Don't do it!!!! Show me where in the U.S. Constitution you get to tell me I can't promote my company via calling you. Not to mention here is yet one more expansion of the US Federal Government and yet one more reason to raise our taxes, as someone has to pay for maintaining this "no call list." Also check who is exempt from this list, not little mom and pop companies that are the back bone of this country, but the big megacorps who have enough money to pay off your congressmen to keep their companies off this list. Sure it sounds like a nice idea, but dig a little deeper. Again... DON'T DO IT!!!

Mathias Ice

narf poit chez BOOM · #4 July 11th, 2003, 12:04 AM

we rarely get bothered. they maintain lists of people who are likely to buy if they call. we hang up.

Thermodyne · #5 July 11th, 2003, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mathias_Ice:
Don't do it!!!! Show me where in the U.S. Constitution you get to tell me I can't promote my company via calling you. Not to mention here is yet one more expansion of the US Federal Government and yet one more reason to raise our taxes, as someone has to pay for maintaining this "no call list." Also check who is exempt from this list, not little mom and pop companies that are the back bone of this country, but the big megacorps who have enough money to pay off your congressmen to keep their companies off this list. Sure it sounds like a nice idea, but dig a little deeper. Again... DON'T DO IT!!!

Mathias Ice

LOL like the framers of the constitution had the need to worry about phone spam.

The right to privacy would be the issue here.

Mathias_Ice · #6 July 11th, 2003, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Thermodyne:
LOL like the framers of the constitution had the need to worry about phone spam.

The right to privacy would be the issue here.

What the framers of the U.S. Constitution were worried about was limiting the size of the Federal government. Of course this fact has been all but ignored by both major political parties in the United States. As far as a right to privacy, a reading of the U.S. Constitution reveals no stated "right to privacy." This so-called right comes from Supreme Court judges deciding that Article IV of the Bill of Rights which states "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." I don't see "right to privacy" in that. But then again when you have Supreme Court judges who believe the U.S. Constitution should be discarded, insist on imposing a "seperation of church and state" (definitalty NOT in th U.S. Constitution,) and consistently ignore Article X of the Bill of Rights which states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," what do you expect?

Mathias Ice