American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (23828)	10/31/2007 3:02:21 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 71588

You passed on the "why"? part when discussing the idea that they where wrong. The two things you mentioned where - "Right against search and seizure... habeas corpus". I'm not sure how habeas corpus is even relevant. Business execs or shareholders have habeas corpus rights because they are people. Corporations aren't thrown in prison. You can't lock up IBM or GE. So what habeas corpus right do the corporations have, and how can they take advantage of it, and why is this a problem? As for rights against search and seizure do you really think any corporate owned property should be subject to search and seizure at the whim of cop or federal agent with no need for warrants or probably cause? These two seem a really odd selection as problematic rights for corporations. The most often used example is limited liability. Now I strongly oppose getting rid of limited liability, but at least I can sort of understand the rational of some of the better arguers for the idea. I think lifting it would be a disaster, but why foolish the idea isn't exactly silly.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next