You heard about the recent Do Not Call fiasco. A law was passed that would have stopped these pests from calling us at home during dinner. Fifty million people signed up, and a federal judge substituted his will for the clear will of the people. He said the First Amendment required this result.

I am an environmental lawyer and you might wonder how this is an environmental issue. Especially one that touches people at home. Here is how: these pests are creating noise when they molest us. We are all so busy and we need quiet time at home. Just as we are resting, cathing up with our families, re-collecting our thoughts, they call us. The phone rings: Noise. They bother us and take our time and make us mad. Noise. Its all unwanted noise.

Let’s look at this First Amendment. Most people haven’t read it in a long time. So here it is:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The judge has concluded that this law abridges the freedom of speech. “Abridge” does not cross over water, it means to deprive or diminish. Under the law people could sign up to be on a government administered list. If you were on the list and the roaches called, they got fined.

How does this abridge any ones right to free speech? The government is doing nothing except collecting the names of people who do not want to be bothered. Should these predators be able to call and bother people that do not want them to call? They can call anyone who is not on the list and presumably want to be called. It's just those who want to be left alone that cannot be called.

How could our Constitution be interpreted to require us to be victims? Fifty million people have already asked to be left alone by placing their names on this list. What this Court has effectively concluded is that these 50 million people have no right to be left alone. And that the Constitution requires that these nuisance telesellers be allowed to bother us, day after day.

The Constitution cannot really mean this. No one can really have a protected right to call people that do not want to be called.

I have a more important question. Why would any tele-idiot company want to call someone who does not want to be called? Do they really think that this will result in a sale or an election win?

I hope that sooner or later this law will become effective. I do not believe the Constitution empowers low-lives to create unwanted noise and harass us.

Until this is fixed, don’t politely tell the companies that you are not interested, if they have the nerve to call you and if you are on the list. Just hang up.

I do not support rude behavior. But these companies are rude. You need to respond in kind.

Why would they want to call any of the 50 million people who do not want to be called, anyway?

Published: October 2, 2003

Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright laws.