From: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 93 08:22:17 PDT
To: zane@genesis.mcs.com (Sameer)
Subject: Re: Contempt of court
In-Reply-To: <m0o6XZy-000MVlC@genesis.mcs.com>
Message-ID: <199306181522.AA06530@eff.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


 
Sameer, the roots of the Third Amendment are not in surveillance, but
in the English Crown's desire to minimize the costs of maintaining troops
abroad.


--Mike


> In message <9306172054.AA09055@snark.shearson.com>, "Perry E. Metzger" writes:
> > technically exhausted his right to appeal. It seems like its only a
> > matter of time before other than stopping the government from
> > quartering soldiers in your home except in time of war, there will be
> > nothing more the courts will prevent.
> > 
> 	I read somewhere on the net a *very* interesting interpretation of
> the 3rd amendment, which cypherpunks might find interesting.
> 	It was claimed that in colonial times, the British authorities
> quartered troops in people's homes as a form of surveillance. E.g. Tom
> Jefferson is suspected of conspiring with friends to communicate
> privately :-), thus the local British military leader learns of this
> suspicion and quarters troops in Tom's home.
> 	Under this interpretation, it was claimed that the 3rd amendment
> provides protection from government surveillance.
> 
> 	I think it's stretching things a bit, but a very interesting way
> to look at it.
> 
> --
> | Sameer Parekh-zane@genesis.MCS.COM-PFA related mail to pfa@genesis.MCS.COM |
> | Apprentice Philosopher, Writer, Physicist, Healer, Programmer, Lover, more |
> | "Symbiosis is Good" - Me_"Specialization is for Insects" - R. A. Heinlein_/
>  \_______________________/ \______________________________________________/ 
>