Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Knock, Knock, It's the FBI
GooseHead:
Everyone wants to be safe from robbery, burglary, murder, and so on. So why attack those who are working at preventing those crimes from being committed. Laws are established not only by the legislative authorities, but by citizen demanding the laws to be established to protect individuals and properties. Stop attacking those who work to make your life and property safe. If the police or the FBI came to your business and home, there was more than just a click on a web-site that initiated their investigations; there was probably other crimes being committed.
f0dder:
This is a very sensitive topic.
I have found myself falling between a couple thousand chairs on the matter.
Freedom - I love it. It's a pretty neat thing. We could have a load of discussions for and against it but let us try and agree the it's generally a good thing. But... freedom vs. regulation. Camreas, DNA banks, big brother... that's where the issue is.
My younger brother was recently by a stone, some madman thought it was fun to drop crap from a highway bridge. And that has made me think, think, think think, and think a bit more. I was never too fond of 1984 and the implications it has brought on us. And while my political views are probably anti-liberalist :), I have never been a fan of total freedom (because it limits the freedom of other people).
OK, sorry, that was a bit too close to our fine grey line here.
Trying to re-focus, I have been having thougts about automated surveillance and and DNA banks. And the argument that they who have nothing to hide are safe, has been wheieing very heavily. If we had a global DNA bank, the idiot(s?) that nearly killed half of my family might very easily have been found.
But, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
cranioscopical:
I have been having thougts about automated surveillance and and DNA banks. And the argument that they who have nothing to hide are safe, has been wheieing very heavily. If we had a global DNA bank, the idiot(s?) that nearly killed half of my family might very easily have been found.
-f0dder (May 04, 2008, 01:26 PM)
--- End quote ---
An event that threatens someone close to us does change the focus a bit!
Apart from the rights and wrongs of the issue, it's the degree of error in the systems that really scares me.
Get on the wrong list and then try to get yourself off again... from in jail? without reasonable access? with no funds?
How does one reach a forum in which to appeal?
Recently, I found it a considerable challenge to reach a human being at the federal agency responsible for income tax -- and I wanted to pay some tax. Heaven help me had I wanted to avoid it, or challenge an erroneous assessment!
:tellme:
Carol Haynes:
If we had a global DNA bank, the idiot(s?) that nearly killed half of my family might very easily have been found.
-f0dder (May 04, 2008, 01:26 PM)
--- End quote ---
Trouble is DNA is not a perfect tool - for a start it isn't unique (they currently use only a few markers not the full DNA string) and it is very easy to frame someone with DND evidence planted at the scene of a crime.
I for one would be strongly opposed to submitting my DNA to a national (let alone global) DNA bank - they reckon that in the UK alone every DNA sample would match about eight to ten different people - world wide the match would be astronomically high.
there is also a groundswell of opinion that samples collected in the course of an investigation from innocent people should be destroyed. The police and government don't like that idea.
There have been a whole string of convictions in the UK based on 'expert' witness evidence that have proved to be miscarriages of justice - not least some high profile terrorist cases where innocent people had to be freed after spending years in prison.
If the police or the FBI came to your business and home, there was more than just a click on a web-site that initiated their investigations; there was probably other crimes being committed.
-GooseHead (May 04, 2008, 01:10 PM)
--- End quote ---
So much for innocent until proven guilty - now if the law enforcers knock on your door you MUST be guilty. Frightening thought.
Renegade:
The issue to me is "reasonable restrictions on freedom."
It's reasonable to stop people from stealing from others, assaulting others, etc.
It's not reasonable to jail someone without evidence. That's what the original post was about. The IP and click thing just doesn't provide enough evidence to jail someone. It's easily summed up in 1 word: Spoofing.
As for attacking those that are supposed to protect us, I paraphrase, "Who watches the watchers?"
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version