# National Do Not Call List may be illegal? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 24, 2003, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/national-do-not-call-list-may-be-illegal/203564 "2003-09-24T16:43:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2003, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/national-do-not-call-list-may-be-illegal/203564/101 "2003-09-26T12:17:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Linus Van Pelt \* > \*\*I’m getting pretty sick of all the people that I’m hearing quoted saying “50 million people can’t be wrong” … but the number of registrants (and I’m one of them) means neither diddly nor squat in regard to whether or not it was legally implemented. \*\* Funny. If 50 million can’t be wrong, then that means that 230 million are. However, what they were trying to say was that congress is willing to act fast when 50 million people make their wishes known (the 'can’t be wrong thing is in association with the revised bill). As far as the DMA saying they don’t want to call people who don’t want to be called…yeah they have said it. I want to say that I heard some stooge of theirs saying that they have a DNC list that works, but when you got to their website they only have links to state no call lists. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2003, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/national-do-not-call-list-may-be-illegal/203564/102 "2003-09-26T15:04:20Z")
First I like Dave Barry (bolding mine): “Leading the charge for the telemarketing industry is the American Teleservices Association (suggested motto: 'Some Day, We Will Get a Dictionary and Look Up ‘Services’ ‘’). This group argues that, if its members are prohibited from calling people who do not want to be called, then two million telemarketers will lose their jobs. Of course, you could use pretty much the same reasoning to argue that laws against mugging cause unemployment among muggers. But that would be unfair. **Muggers rarely intrude into your home**.” Secondly I agree that no receptionist at the Telemarketing Association (aka Spawn of the Devil; motto “We live to annoy”) should be persecuted. (Although if nobody would work for them, that would be an improvement…) So just phone the receptionist, and ask to be put through to their boss. then politely explain to them why telemarketers annoy you. Then phone again, because the boss will appreciate the chance to hear you. The same applies with the judge. I don’t know about the legality of his ruling. But I do see that my right to free speech means that I can phone him at home (because that’s convenient for me) and politely ask him to explain the ruling. If I don’t understand, then I simply have to phone him again. And again. of course this is not harrassment, merely good marketing. :rolleyes: And if the judge tries for a court order preventing me phoning, I hope there is another judge who will overrule that! ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2003, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/national-do-not-call-list-may-be-illegal/203564/103 "2003-09-26T15:13:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by blowero \* > \*\* This is about not cold-calling people at home who have asked not to be cold-called. This isn’t an issue of unequal First Amendment rights, because it’s got fuck-all to do with the First Amendment. \*\* Well, it might be, because the Do-Not-Call list applies to telemarketers and not charities or politicians. Even under the list, charities and political groups can cold call people. ---
**Author:** ![NajaNivea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/22d042/32.png) [@NajaNivea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NajaNivea)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2003, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/national-do-not-call-list-may-be-illegal/203564/104 "2003-09-29T01:38:53Z")
> [@](#): > > Well, it might be, because the Do-Not-Call list applies to telemarketers and not charities or politicians. Even under the list, charities and political groups can cold call people. Non-commercial (particularly political) speech is afforded a different level of protection under the first amendment than commercial speech. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2003, 8:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/national-do-not-call-list-may-be-illegal/203564/105 "2003-09-29T08:02:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MixieArmadillo \* > \*\*Non-commercial (particularly political) speech is afforded a different level of protection under the first amendment than commercial speech. \*\* That’s the point I and a couple others have been trying to make over here: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=213529](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=213529) Please join the debate. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/national-do-not-call-list-may-be-illegal/203564.md?page=5)