Reply To: NARSOL’S AR affiliate: “Limit registry access to LE”




You make some excellent points that, honestly, I hadn’t really thought about. I suppose I had always been more focused on the blatant unconstitutionality of the registry and the typical arguments used by the state to support its existance (ie., “public protection”, “Civil regulation”, etc.). But, you’re right; there is much more to it. The typical arguments used so often by the state in support of the registry are honestly very easy to dispute when a strict interpretation of the constitution is applied; and, any judge knowledgeable of the constitution certainly would realize the conflict. Yet, still, here we are…

Perhaps, because – as you stated well – there is a much bigger underlying issue: To overturn the registry as unconstitutional would be an assault on Big Business and the current lucrative market of individuals data. I’ve often wondered why I’m required to list my email address (es) . Afterall, what is the point? Why would they need it? And, wouldn’t a warrant be needed to monitor it? Unless, it was given “voluntarily” under the guise of “Civil regulation”? Afterall, WHAT ARE THEY INFACT DOING WITH MY EMAIL ADDRESS? What does that have to do with…anything…especially as it relates to “Public Protection”?

You bring up a point I hadn’t really considered, but one now that I really can see as a primary motive for the very existance of the registry. It opens a big door for even more future arguments against privacy and the marketing of data for…everyone. And, afterall, YOU THE PUBLIC, were all for it (based on “Civil regulation”) don’t you remember?

#1 rule is $$$$ is behind nearly every unconstitutional law, war, and individual privacy violation.