Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Crizbibble t1_j90yz58 wrote

Reply to comment by CAPSLOCKCHAMP in Virginia Governor Kills Bill Banning Police From Seeking Menstrual Histories of Women by Sasu105

Honestly this is a small government thing to do. The bill would of excluded in particular app data related to women’s menstruation. That is an additional process and not limiting a process. I hate republicans too but this law was going to make certain data unobtainable by law enforcement for whatever reason and I am sure they’re reasons you may need this data in a criminal investigation. In conclusion if this law was passed women would be treated as a special class and their menstruation data excluded from criminal investigations. That doesn’t seem like a good law.

−9

Six_Pack_Attack t1_j9106qm wrote

Honest question, when would menstruation data be used in a non-anortion related criminal investigation where the same information couldn't be retrieved using another investigative measure?

12

Crizbibble t1_j910lme wrote

I have no idea tbh and haven’t given it any thought whatsoever. All I’m saying is this law was being made to exclude certain private data from law enforcement and that doesn’t seem like a good idea. If they file the proper paperwork to get a warrant for information related to a criminal investigation it should be honor just like everyone else’s data. The only use case I can think of off the top of my head would be something related to a pregnancy or to impeach a persons testimony related to menstruation. As I’m not a woman I am really limited in coming up with things I do not completely understand.

−9

1573594268 t1_j91l4sf wrote

>I have no idea tbh and haven’t given it any thought whatsoever.

Clearly.

10

Crizbibble t1_j91lg1u wrote

Lol what is that suppose to mean? He didn’t sign a law preventing menstruation data being used in law enforcement. You folks don’t even read the articles yet you want to try to be an edge lord with nothing important to say.

−4

ThePhoneBook t1_j94wfgb wrote

In general, the government should have access to no private data. Having access to private data is the exception, not the rule. 4A is the basis for this. The Amendment is not trying to say the government can have nothing except when a judge signs a piece of paper when the government can then have everything. That would render the Amendment meaningless.

What is more, when it comes to court, irrelevant or otherwise out of scope information is inadmissible. And the law is full of instructions and specific examples. What this bill would do is streamline the process for noting that menstrual history is out of scope of any investigation. It stops the system causing heartache, wasting time, and (which is the greatest concern) innovating case law to punish abortions

3