Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pcserver2!ddsw1!zane From: zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Sameer Parekh) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Privacy of personal data (was Re: Personal Privacy Violations) Message-ID: <1991Jan26.000206.2296@ddsw1.MCS.COM> Date: 26 Jan 91 00:02:06 GMT References: <1991Jan12.180934.1314@looking.on.ca> <5825@rsiatl.Dixie.Com> Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Wheeling, IL Lines: 19 In article abrams@cs.columbia.edu (Steven Abrams) writes: >However, there is protection of privacy under the law -- harassment, >invasion of privacy, are examples of violations. But to say that the >Bill of Rights *implies* the "right to be left alone" is something I >haven't heard. If my history is correct, when the Constitution was >written, the only way the Framers were able to get it passed was to >promise that there would be a Bill of Rights added to it to guarantee >personal freedoms. Nothing was to be left implied. If the right of >privacy was just expected to be there, I don't think that protection >against unauthorized search would have had to be included. But suppose the Framers have forgotten something. . . What then? These people were human, after all, and subject to error. They were not dummies, however. So that is why they included the 10th amendment. I think it says something to the affect that the rights stated here are not supposed to be ALL the rights someone has, and the other rights inherent in man are ALSO to be protected. -- zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM