> The Fourteenth Amendment doesn't all governmental discriminations: only
> certain ones, such as discrimination based on race, gender, legitimacy of
> birth, and citizenship. For example, my local government discriminates
> against persons driving more than 25 MPH in a school zone when children
> are present, and that's quite constitutional. As mentioned earlier, it's
> quite constitutional to discriminate between someone who sends a solicited
> fax and someone who sends an unsolicited fax.
The laws on driving prohibit actions. Besides, the right to
drive an automobile (unlike the right to own a gun) is not
Constitutionally protected. It's a privilege of which
drivers must continually prove themselves worthy.
I'm arguing that your proposed legislation against spammers
is based on intention, not action. We have a Constitutional
right to send mail. Your legislation attempts to deny that
right to a class of mailers with the wrong motives.
> A bigger problem is the First Amendment, but I think that the restrictions
> I propose would be well within the time/place/manner types of restrictions
> that have been repeatedly upheld by the courts.
Well, yes, exactly. The 14th strengthens the 1st, among its
other provisions.
My final point: E-mail is driven by digital code --
software programs. We're better off stopping spam by writing
better code than by writing more laws.
Regards,
Vicki
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved