[tabacco]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/971734.asp?0cv=CB10

I'm soooo mad at our courts right now. They actually claim that a national do-not-call list to block telemarketers infringes on the telemarketers' freedom of speech. As if they somehow have the right to disturb me in my own home using a line I pay a monthly fee to access to sell me products I don't want.

Argh!

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Two words in regards the court's decision: Bull. Shit.

[Zygomaticus]

This brings up the question of to what extent freedom of speech is allowed.

From what I've read, it was ruled, at some point in time, that the right to freedom of speech only exists when you are not hindering other people from going about their daily business. I think it came up when a group of university students sat down on a highway, essentially causing a couple of accidents and a humungous traffic jam, because they didn't approve of the Vietnam war. They were "exercising their right to freedom of speech." It was after that, that they made the above mentioned distinction. Now since their freedom of speech disrupts your and my day, this shouldn't be necessarily protected as such by the First Amendment.

Then again, I'm no lawyer. I'm just a kid

[tabacco]

Plus I don't think corporations as an entity are protected by the first amendment.

[GreenJeanz]

Actually, they are.(*)
But this is still absurd.

[remixor]

Well, from a totally objective point of view, the court's decision IS an infringement upon free spech. That doesn't matter though! As krkode correctly pointed out, there are indeed lawful limits on free spech. There are many activities that are in theory exercises of free speech but are quite simply illegal because they themselves put undue duress on the lives of others. Examples include krkode's situation (though that was certainly not the first example), shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded room in which there is no fire, and calling in death threats to people like the President. Some examples are more harmful than others, but I think it's absurd that the courts would rule in favor of blocking the Do Not Call list. The thought that disturbing people during periods when one KNOWS they will be either relaxing or otherwise occupied at home (that's precisely why they call when they do--they know most people will be home from work/school/errands) should be constitutionally protected is a ludicrous notion to ANYBODY except telemarketers.

I take some solace in the fact that most likely this ruling will be overturned by a higher court.

[Zygomaticus]

My job as a minor at home is a monotonous repeating of the words, "My parents aren't home right now. Could you call later?"

I do this irrespective of where they are

[tabacco]

On my to-do list for telemarketers:

Marketer: "Good afternoon, sir. Are you happy with your long distance service?"
Me: "Oh, right, what's the counter-password? Um... Right! 'The electrified otter glides effortlessly through the pond.'"
Marketer: "I beg your pardon, sir?"
Me: "Aren't you my top-secret contact? You know the right password! You say 'Are you happy with your long ditance service,' I say 'The electrified otter glides effortlessly through the pond,' and then you're supposed to give me the top-secret missile launch codes. The president is waiting, you know!"

[Wormsie]

I usually try to sell them my old coffee maker.

[ragnar]

I think the only sensible thing is to do what they did on Golgafrincham. I.e. send the telemarketers (and similar people) off to another planet. Preferably as long away as possible.

[Tamara]

I think it was the hairdressers that they'd sent off, rags ... ?

In any case .. I've never actually been telemarketed .. oh wait, actually now I remember, one time. But certainly not enough for me to get really annoyed with them.

[ragnar]

Originally Posted by Tamara

I think it was the hairdressers that they'd sent off, rags ... ?

It was all kind of people like haridressers, telephone sanitzers, marketing people. Simply put all those who ain't workers, leaders or creative people.

And note that the people of Golgafrincham later died from a disease developed with a dirty telephone.

[twifkak]

As far as funny things to do to telemarketers, I like the Seinfeld way of asking the guy for his home phone #.

As far as that court decision, well, the House already voted 418-6 or something to support the DNC list, so I don't think we have to worry about the one fluke. Sadly, though, the House decision wasn't any less politically motivated than the court decision. I've pretty much decided that truth has no place in government.

[DomStLeger]

And On my to-do list for telemarketers:

Marketer: "Good afternoon, sir. Are you happy with your long distance service?"
Me: "Good afternoon, sir. Are you happy with your long distance service?"
Marketer: "Er... Pardon Sir"
Me: "Er... Pardon Sir"
*hangup*

*Sigh* or more realisticly:

Marketer: "Good afternoon, sir. Are you happy with your long distance service?"
Me: "Um... no"
Marketer: "Would you be interested if I told you I could cut the cost of long distance calls in half?"
Me: "Very interested!"
etc

[Intrepid Homoludens]

This one has always worked for me:

Telemarketer: "Good evening, how are you? Is the head of the household home?"
Me: "No, he never gets home before 12.30 am - work."
Telemarketer: "Oh, well then may I leave my name and phone number?"
Me: "Sure, maybe he'll call you back."
Telemarketer: "That's all right then. Have a good evening."
Me: "I am now. Bye." [click]

Works every time.

[tabacco]

Originally Posted by twifkak

As far as that court decision, well, the House already voted 418-6 or something to support the DNC list, so I don't think we have to worry about the one fluke. Sadly, though, the House decision wasn't any less politically motivated than the court decision. I've pretty much decided that truth has no place in government.

The house passed it 412-8 against, and the senate passed it 95-0, and Bush said he "looked forward to signing it." All in the space of <24 hours. That's quite possibly the fastest I've ever seen a bill go through the system. Then it got overturned by the Colorado federal court as unconstitutional. Now the 10th circuit court of appeals in Denver is going to take a look at it.