Not really, you'd still get your name checked off on the voter rolls when you get your ballot and someone latter aggregates the whole thing. Biggest difference is that it would make it slightly less harder to vote for someone else (to prevent their vote) as you might end up being the second person to ask... Vs knowing ahead of time who isn't likely.

Not only did you not read the article I had mentioned previously which pointed to people ending up in jail (even if for brief periods) due to debts, but you didn't even read the one you linked to!

However, there are a few situations when you might face jail time in connection with a debt.

The funny thing is that it even goes on to name some of them! See that first one... about violating a court order? That normally is referred to a contempt, and getting locked up for a day or 90 is one of the possible punishments.

I'm still waiting for someone to cite something which calls what I'm saying bullshit... odd that? Oh right... /.

Getting a contempt order is by no means an automatic thing... you first have to go back to the judge and inform them of the violation, maybe even give a chance to the violator an opportunity to respond... it's then up to the judge if and how they will proceed... in fact this is the same process under which (then) President Bill Clinton was held in contempt. Judicial notices can be fun.

Same goes for a writ of mandamus... once you have a judges order in hand against a civil servant who is refusing to do their job things tend to get moving as a contempt order is always a risk.

Citation?

I love it when I challenge someone for a citation and the first response is someone demanding a citation from me (without any of their own).

You can't be held in contempt for not showing up to a civil hearing, you just lose by default.

While there should have been an or in there... and failure to appear is a valid cause to be arrested in some states... such as Minnesota: http://www.startribune.com/inv...

I've a friend in California whose ex was issued a bench warrant for failing to show up to a child support hearing (there had been a long series of them and he missed two in a row).

And you won't go to jail for not paying a judgement,

You clearly don't know how much power a judge has.

Don't believe me? Try this:

1. You give me your email address
2. I send you an email, in response you send me a signed and notarized document promising to pay me $50,000 within 30 days as a thanks for the email.
3. Fail to pay me within 30 days.
4. After multiple attempts by me to collect on this debt, I go to court and get a judgment against you to pay me the full amount of debt within 30 days (I'll skip the interest in this case).
5. Fail to pay me within the next 30 days.
6. I return to the judge and tell them that you still have not complied with their order.
7. They give you one last chance to comply within the next 7 days.
8. 7 days elapse without payment
9. Judge holds you in contempt.

See how easy that was?

if you fail to repay $1000 the debt collectors come for you, your credit history is wiped and you could even go to jail.

Citation?

The debt collectors actions are civil, not criminal and have no power of their own to have you arrested or jailed.

Now, if the debt collector sues you in court, you fail to appear or fail to pay when the judge has ordered you to repay promptly and do not... then you can get hit with a contempt of court charge which could result in jail time... though this is not unique to debt collections, any engagement with a judge can have the same outcome.

but doing this yourself seems to be a lot cheaper.

Oh? Have you factored in the cost of ensuring that you always have an offsite and fully up to date copy, not to mention secondary and tertiary copies for transit time in case your primary datacenter/server happens to kick the bucket/get stolen/evaporate?

It's easy to compare the cost of an offered service to what you can pick up seeming similar equipment for from Amazon or Newegg... the realities though are far more complex.

and cannot put anything confidential there (unless you are not bothered by various TLAs searching through it).

There are ways to manage even that, see this brief bit of Wikipedia for a start.

I don't know if there are any other commercial or enterprise products out there that do it, but I know this one stores all of it's data in the cloud (with a local cache) but does all of the encryption on site. Only if you choose does the encryption key leave your site and then only in a way you choose making it rather problematic for a TLA or Microsoft to get to your data.

It is an interesting world when you are dealing with data you cannot legally delete for a period of time and simply want to rid yourself of the burden of having to store it locally. Suing Google or Amazon because their cold storage failed is a far better option than having your IT guy tell you that the HD they stored the crucial data to doesn't spin up anymore... and that the backup disk ended up in the secretary desktop.

A Snowden trial could... however as I recall, under evidence rules in the US his ability to showcase potentially illegal acts that only came to light due to his own classified leaks is not permitted.

On the other side, no group that I am aware of has sued and won over the various Snowden revelations so as to establish a precedent which a Snowden defense could be based.

So... Snowden 'allegedly' violated the law because he's not yet been convicted... but the "illegal acts that were being covered up" are in fact... illegal acts? Have said acts also been adjudicated as illegal?

I could be mistaken... but at last check more courts have non-overturned rulings finding that the administration was engaged in an illegal amnesty program than have found that the information revealed by Snowden to be of illegal actions.

You really should look into the history of why that facility was established where it was, I'd start with an understanding of the Eisentrager case first: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

I think the fact that the USAG won't guarantee his constitutional right to a fair trial

How exactly is the AG doing that?

How exactly are you (the AC) going to determine if it is a fair trial or not?

They are a private company that has a published set of terms and conditions.

Can a baker, florist or photographer put forth a set of terms and conditions with regards to what kind of events they will provide services for?

The courts have been saying no for a while now in the case of some events they may disagree with: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

It is an interesting world where some people/companies are compelled to provide services equally (if they want to remain in business), while others are given a pass.

I'm still waiting for a case like this to happen in the US as it would be rather entertaining viewing: http://www.nationalreview.com/...

Is that you Gecko45?

and give them grounds to point the finger at the west and say "See, they are a bunch of infidels that deserve what they get!".

Eating pork, drinking alcohol, not praying to Allah five times a day and allowing my wife to drive and not cover her face head while I draw a cartoon about Jesus, Moses and Mohammed walking into a bar is plenty enough reason for them already.

When you are dealing with hyper-sensitive people you have two choices:
1) Change your entire lifestyle so as to walk around on egg shells and hope and pray they don't get offended, or
2) Live your life normally and require them to develop a thicker skin.

There was a time in this country where #2 was actually the norm, alas people like you however keep trying to push us harder and harder towards #1.

But then, it's easy for me to say that... I am an adult, I simply do not get offended regardless of what someone says about me or something that I care about. It's part of being an adult.

Know what we call people who freak out at every little thing?

Children... and Democrats... but mostly children.