The judge or judges that say it is an unconstitutional breach of the freedom of speech laws,concerning the telemarketers "do not call list", need to stop and think about what freedom of speech meant to the founders of the greatest democracy ever known.
A history lesson may be what they need.
Freedom of speech was granted to the citizens of the United States to ensure that all issues concerning the governing and leadership of this country could be debated by people without fear of reprisal from the government or other municipal agencies.
The simplicity of the law was it's greatest feature, allow the citizens to speak out against bad leaders, stupid laws, corrupt
police, etc. ,and also to freely voice opinions on any subject in a PUBLIC FORUM without worrying about being imprisoned for their ideas or views.
Telemarketers do not have the right to call me whenever they want. I do not have a listed number, I do not wish to be bothered while I am enjoying sex, eating, napping, or expecting an important call.
The freedom of speech laws apply to issues of public matter only.
If a government agency has made a law that protects private citizens from annoying phone calls(and don't tell me I am in the minority point of view) then that is fine with me. Do not call me. Impeach that judge.

 

As much as I hate to admit it, the way the telemarketers won the case has merit.

Basically, they argued that it is not equal protection under the constitutional free speech clause. If you ban them, then you must ban charities and anyone else from making solicitations. Since charities and companies you previously did business with were allowed under the no-call list the telemarketing companies could rightly claim they did not get equal protection and consideration under the law.

The law will need to be written in such a way as to be constitutional. Whether we like a decision doesn't matter. What matters is if the law stands up to the protections granted by the constitution. Our system was set up to avoid the changing whims of public opinion and be react slow to change. Federal judges are appointed for life in order to guarantee that they can make decisions based upon law (or their interpretation of it) and constitutionality rather than having to worry about public opinion. The public rarely considers constitutional issues and forms many of its opinions emotionally. Sometimes we don't like that, but in the end its the best system there is.

I hope they come up with something that passes the test, because frankly I don't like the calls either (charity or otherwise).

 

As much as I hate telemarketers or other gimme money calls and hate the judges decision.. I have to agree with webmaster on this one. Our form of government is not easy to run. There are so many sides to each issue. Running our Republic is a very delicate balancing act.

 

How about this, if they can call me when I'm sleeping or having dinner. They should have to give me their number at home so I can call them up when I feel like it. Its only fair.

 

I have told them that 13, Hey why don't you give me your number at home and I will call you when it's a good time for me. I have made a game out of thinking of things to say.
I am just finishing up a world class bowel movement, mind if I lay the phone down so I can wipe?
My time is worth $50.00 an hour who will I be billing this to?

Lately we have had a rash of sales calls for long distance service and they always ask if I am happy with my provider. I say in my best hillbilly drawl, wul Ima talking on the phone so it must be aworkin. Then they tell me how much better deal they can offer and I start negotiating. Well that sounds pretty good but I already have a better offer, what else can you throw in.
Well I have some more that I am just waiting for the next one to call so I can try them out. I have plagurized Roy D. a few times.

 

Lord, they're annoying, but why not just hang up the phone?

While I fully understand your statement (and fully agree with it I might add), why not just turn the ringer down and let the machine get it? Or, unplug the phone. You can always just plug it back in when you're done with what you're doing. I guess the drawback to that is someone important might actually call you with an important message at that exact time, but how often does that actually happen?

 

I just like to waste as much of their time as possible and not buy anything. I got one girl going for almost 20 miutes once. I mentioned being from Alaska and of course everyone has always wanted to visit so I filled her to the brim with bunk. HeHeHe

 

I look at it like this:

I pay my phone bill with MY hard earned money, so when I want to use my phone, I can . It's MY decision who gets to talk on it or not. When telemarketing companies start offering rebates on my phone bill, they are more than welcome to call me. Until then, if I need their services; I'll CALL THEM. I believe that as long as I AM THE ONE paying the bill; their public "freedoms" do not apply to PRIVATE usage in my home. It's no different than door to door salesmen on the front porch . If it gets to a point where it becomes invasive or disrupting, it's not SALES; it's TRESSPASSING. I don't see the difference with telephone salesmen.

 

Geezer is right, it is invading your home uninvited no matter how you look at the constitution.
It is just like sexual harassment. A woman can decide if she likes the advances of a male or not. If she does it's romance, if she doesn't it's sexual harassment. I think we need to look at phone solitication the same way. If I want my favorite charities to be able to call that shouldn'r mean I have to accept every fast talking con man in the world with a speed dialer and something to sell.

 

The Constitutional issue is equal protection. You can't ban one and not the other. Like I said.... it seems you're looking at this from an emotional viewpoint. Either you ban them all or you don't ban them. The law struct down didn't ban them all so it will need to be rewritten.

The Constitution free speech clause is there to protect unpopular speach, not popular speech (which there is no need to protect). The Constitution doesn't care about what is liked, disliked, popular or unpopular.

If you've read the Constitution you know there is no Constitutional right to privacy.

 

Ken, I am guilty of never having read the constution in it's entirety and I didn't know we had no right to privacy. I have been misinformed all these years that your home was your sanctuary and you had the right to decide what and whom entered it within the law.
If nobody likes these intrusions but the law states we have to allow it or ban something else too then I guess it is time to start writing the old congressman in droves to let them know how we feel and get a different law or interpretation of the existing one.
Thanks for keeping us emotional people on an even keel sometimes.

 

You have property rights but your phone service is not a tangible property. Its the same reason why companies can share information about you. Because its not constitutionally protected they can do it unless laws get enacted (some have been).

Don't get me wrong... I really want to see the calls stop just as much as anyone. To do that they need to come up with a bullet-proof law because even if this one was upheld it wouldn't stop the companies from moving to Canada and calling you from there.

 

Nicely put, Ken

 

Another solution may be to just get rid of the land line and live with the cell phone. I know people who have only a cell and they get by just fine. I also know plenty of folks with caller ID and they just don't answer it if they don't recognize the caller(and sometimes even if they do.lol)
I pretty much never answer the phone unless I am expecting a call or my wife is and asks me to answer it if it rings.

 

No right to privacy is scary. Those long-distance providers that I've never heard of call me and say, well, last month your bill was 37.52, your calls were out of state, we can get you a better deal. Don't like the idea that some unknown phone jockey has access to my personal info without my permission.

I use the caller ID too, and don't answer if the # is unavailable. I will not give to charities over the phone, I ask them to mail me an info packet before I decide.

I look forward to the day when they put in a cell tower near me so I can switch to all-cell.