[Editor's Note: Please welcome BrainRants, Stuph Maphia™. Funny story. A few weeks ago 1jaded1 asked me if I read BrainRants. I thought she was confused and meant brainsnorts, and I said yes without further thought. Then a day or two later I received a comment from BrainRants and then realized that I was the one who was confused. Sorry, Jaded. If it's any consolation this just proves you're smarter than me. Take that for what it's worth, which isn't much.
See? I’m a member!
In the short time I’ve been following BrainRants I’ve found him to be witty, intelligent, articulate, hilarious, and crude. And that’s my kind of people. He has since become a member of the Maphia™ and I’m now a card-carrying member (huh huh) of the Rants Army™.
As always, folks, please ensure you visit our guest’s blog and click on the almighty follow button. You’ll be sorry if you don’t. Hell, you may even become a card-carrying member, like me.]
“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.” — Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
I wrote a glib piece about proposed Amendments to our (American) Constitution a while ago as a lark, not really paying attention to the news article I read that sparked the idea. I found several respondent notions about strengthening privacy rights but ignored them. Then I came across another series of articles Continue reading »