General Discussion

TheMadMonk

(6,187 posts)

35. No. The government should not have the ability to go looking...

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:15 AM

Jun 2013

...for crime simply for the sake of finding crime.

Nor should it have the ability to retain information indefinitely just in case it might decide to criminalise recorded activities at a later date.

It is one thing to anticipate crime and put appropriate barriers in place.

It is a completely different thing to seek to identify criminals in advance of their acting and punish them pre-emptively.

And full STASI is something that should NEVER EVER FUCKING BE PERMITTED AGAIN!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Customer Says Best Buy Workers Are Snoops [View all] The Straight Story Jun 2013 OP

But we have a problem with phone metadata Narkos Jun 2013 #1

It's ok to have a problem with both... Pelican Jun 2013 #2

The problem is, no one has a problem with the private sector owning this info Narkos Jun 2013 #4

Well, the benefits vs. costs are NOT in the governments' favor. Pholus Jun 2013 #5

Best Buy doesn't have the power to incarcerate pipoman Jun 2013 #6

You don't believe the government should have the ability Narkos Jun 2013 #8

Ahhh, but is it crimes or terrorism we are talking about here? Pholus Jun 2013 #10

What rules have been broken? Narkos Jun 2013 #11

Be nice if that were open to that much scrutiny. Pholus Jun 2013 #16

Where did you get that number? Narkos Jun 2013 #17

Right here. I like the graphic most of all! Pholus Jun 2013 #18

1660 delayed search warrant notices? Narkos Jun 2013 #20

Laugh it up fuzzball! (*) Pholus Jun 2013 #22

You are cynical about everything Narkos Jun 2013 #24

Yup, that's me. Cynical to the core. Pholus Jun 2013 #26

Post removed Post removed Jun 2013 #29

Stay classy! I'd expect no less from you. nt Pholus Jun 2013 #30

It's not about class, it's about the truth Narkos Jun 2013 #33

Absolutely it is about the truth. Class was already settled. Pholus Jun 2013 #34

Maybe the long standing rule of government transparency pipoman Jun 2013 #25

the rules of open due process. HiPointDem Jun 2013 #39

Fishing isn't investigating crimes.. pipoman Jun 2013 #14

Who says they are fishing? Narkos Jun 2013 #15

Who says they're not? pipoman Jun 2013 #27

They do Narkos Jun 2013 #28

Who else? They are the perpetrators.. pipoman Jun 2013 #31

Post removed Post removed Jun 2013 #32

Do you ever have a thought that exceeds 2 words, or maybe a sentence? pipoman Jun 2013 #37

No. The government should not have the ability to go looking... TheMadMonk Jun 2013 #35

Ah, but they only own one piece of it all, government wants access to it all The Straight Story Jun 2013 #7

I'm sorry you aren't up to date Narkos Jun 2013 #9

Care to expound on that? Because I think I am far more up to date than you know The Straight Story Jun 2013 #13

You're confusing collection vs search Narkos Jun 2013 #19

So, explain to me this: The Straight Story Jun 2013 #21

You're okay with google having carte Blanche Narkos Jun 2013 #23

One you can opt in to The Straight Story Jun 2013 #36

Difference is customers are generally not a threat to a corp. TheMadMonk Jun 2013 #38

A major feature of the voyeur generation! Pholus Jun 2013 #3

this has been happening for years. grok Jun 2013 #12

While a clear violation of this individual's privacy Sherman A1 Jun 2013 #40

I wondered if it was intentional pipoman Jun 2013 #42

It does make you wonder Sherman A1 Jun 2013 #43

My first question is SoCalDem Jun 2013 #41

Blame the victim much??? cbdo2007 Jun 2013 #44

everyone who does something stupid SoCalDem Jun 2013 #45