License-plate scanners on police cars
#21
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling
When the government gathers or analyzes personal information, many people say they’re not worried. “I’ve got nothing to hide,” they declare. “Only if you’re doing something wrong should you worry, and then you don’t deserve to keep it private.”

Privacy, however, is too complex a concept to be reduced to a singular essence. It is a plurality of different things that do not share any one element but nevertheless bear a resemblance to one another. For example, privacy can be invaded by the disclosure of your deepest secrets. It might also be invaded if you’re watched by a peeping Tom, even if no secrets are ever revealed.

Privacy, in other words, involves so many things that it is impossible to reduce them all to one simple idea. And we need not do so.

Legal and policy solutions focus too much on the problems under the Orwellian metaphor—those of surveillance—and aren’t adequately addressing the Kafkaesque problems—those of information processing. The difficulty is that commentators are trying to conceive of the problems caused by databases in terms of surveillance when, in fact, those problems are different.

The deeper problem with the nothing-to-hide argument is that it myopically views privacy as a form of secrecy. In contrast, understanding privacy as a plurality of related issues demonstrates that the disclosure of bad things is just one among many difficulties caused by government security measures.

To what extent should government officials have such a significant power over citizens? This issue isn’t about what information people want to hide but about the power and the structure of government.

When the nothing-to-hide argument is unpacked, and its underlying assumptions examined and challenged, we can see how it shifts the debate to its terms, then draws power from its unfair advantage. The nothing-to-hide argument speaks to some problems but not to others. It represents a singular and narrow way of conceiving of privacy, and it wins by excluding consideration of the other problems often raised with government security measures. When engaged directly, the nothing-to-hide argument can ensnare, for it forces the debate to focus on its narrow understanding of privacy. But when confronted with the plurality of privacy problems implicated by government data collection and use beyond surveillance and disclosure, the nothing-to-hide argument, in the end, has nothing to say.

This is a portion of a piece by Daniel J. Solove
http://www.fabioghioni.net/blog/2011/05/...g-to-hide/

Reply
#22
(07-18-2011, 03:43 PM)Leonard Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling

When the government gathers or analyzes personal information, many people say

...snip...

This is a portion of a piece by Daniel J. Solove
http://www.fabioghioni.net/blog/2011/05/...g-to-hide/

So Len, what do YOU think?

Reply
#23
(07-18-2011, 03:46 PM)Wonky Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 03:43 PM)Leonard Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling

When the government gathers or analyzes personal information, many people say

...snip...

This is a portion of a piece by Daniel J. Solove
http://www.fabioghioni.net/blog/2011/05/...g-to-hide/

So Len, what do YOU think?

Well Wonk, I heartily agree with this author.

I could have plagiarized but gave Mr. Solove the credit instead because I liked what he said and they way that he said it.



Reply
#24
(07-18-2011, 04:03 PM)Leonard Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 03:46 PM)Wonky Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 03:43 PM)Leonard Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling

When the government gathers or analyzes personal information, many people say

...snip...

This is a portion of a piece by Daniel J. Solove
http://www.fabioghioni.net/blog/2011/05/...g-to-hide/

So Len, what do YOU think?

Well Wonk, I heartily agree with this author.

I could have plagiarized but gave Mr. Solove the credit instead because I liked what he said and they way that he said it.

Yea Len, I was just tryin' to get in your kitchen.

Great response. Now I'll go back to staking my playing cards.
Except:
I don't agree with you or Mr. Solove, but hey, that's what makes a horse race. Or something like that.
I'm a "liberal". We even give up our children to the state for education. I even ask the state's permission to marry my wife. What a dummy, huh?
Takes all kinds I guess.
I'd hold the line at the state taking pictures of me in the crapper. Unless of course they said they really needed it for some reason. Razz
Reply
#25
The problem with all that Leonard posted in this case is that where we drive our cars is not private in the first place.
I actually agree with some of what len says but I don't think it applies to scanning my license plate.
I'll worry when they try to or actually do start prying in to my real personal stuff.
Reply
#26
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling

So you wouldn't care if they searched your house without a warrant?
Reply
#27
(07-18-2011, 05:26 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling

So you wouldn't care if they searched your house without a warrant?

Wow. How can you go there? I mean really. Wink
Reply
#28
(07-18-2011, 05:26 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling

So you wouldn't care if they searched your house without a warrant?

Nope. Nothing illegal going on here. Smiling
Reply
#29
(07-18-2011, 05:35 PM)broadzilla Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 05:26 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling

So you wouldn't care if they searched your house without a warrant?

Nope. Nothing illegal going on here. Smiling

Let's hope, for your sake it is not like the Marine in Arizona when he was served with a warrant and nothing illegal was going on eiither.

If you remember he was killed and the SWAT team was found innocent of any wrongdoing. Do you really want to take a chance on being a statistic on the Police Blotter's ''Oops I fucked up'' list?

Reply
#30
(07-18-2011, 06:08 PM)Leonard Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 05:35 PM)broadzilla Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 05:26 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling

So you wouldn't care if they searched your house without a warrant?

Nope. Nothing illegal going on here. Smiling

Let's hope, for your sake it is not like the Marine in Arizona when he was served with a warrant and nothing illegal was going on eiither.

If you remember he was killed and the SWAT team was found innocent of any wrongdoing. Do you really want to take a chance on being a statistic on the Police Blotter's ''Oops I fucked up'' list?

Hey that's great Leonard, tell us the whole story will ya? Where is that thread anyway? did you update it? because I remember the thread and there was not any information that I saw that said that this marine was not guilty of doing anything illegal. Yeah they didn't find anything in his home but does that mean the search was not warranted?
But if you have some new info that shows that the police had a search warrant that was unjustified could you please post it here.
I mean seriously Leonard if you are going to site this case as some kind of precedent then you must have info that proves this marine did nothing at all to cause law enforcement to seek out a judge and obtain a warrant.









Reply
#31
You always back the use of police powers too. The guy is dead, how is he to proclaim his innocence to your satisfaction? Seems to most thinking people it's up to the police to explain why, not up to the dead victim to try and explain why they killed him with no physical evidence against him whatsoever? What do you want, a polygraph before he croaks before you'll believe this guy over cops that lie professionally?
Reply
#32
Quote: 'PonderThis
You always back the use of police powers too.

No I don't I just don't start screaming bad cop at the drop of a hat like you.



Quote:The guy is dead, how is he to proclaim his innocence to your satisfaction? Seems to most thinking people it's up to the police to explain why, not up to the dead victim to try and explain why they killed him with no physical evidence against him whatsoever? What do you want, a polygraph before he croaks before you'll believe this guy over cops that lie professionally?

As usual you can't see my point. The point is that WE DON'T KNOW if this marine was guilty of anything or not.
I'm not talking about what SWAT did. I'm talking about whether or not the warrant was justified.

Leonard was attempting to use this case to prove that an innocent person could be killed by a SWAT team.


And I am trying to point out that Leonard nor anyone else knows what this marine was involved with. Maybe the marine was totally innocent, we don't know yet. So how in the hell is this an example for BZ who has done nothing wrong???

Quote:What do you want, a polygraph before he croaks before you'll believe this guy over cops that lie professionally?

Most "thinking people" would want to see an investigation. would want to see the warrant, would want to hear from the cops who asked for the warrant.

So far we have not heard ANY OF THAT. I can only assume that we will and THEN we can all make intelligent comments about what happens to innocent people.





Reply
#33
(07-18-2011, 06:16 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 06:08 PM)Leonard Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 05:35 PM)broadzilla Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 05:26 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 12:13 PM)broadzilla Wrote: Nothing to hide, don't care...move on...Smiling

So you wouldn't care if they searched your house without a warrant?

Nope. Nothing illegal going on here. Smiling

Let's hope, for your sake it is not like the Marine in Arizona when he was served with a warrant and nothing illegal was going on eiither.

If you remember he was killed and the SWAT team was found innocent of any wrongdoing. Do you really want to take a chance on being a statistic on the Police Blotter's ''Oops I fucked up'' list?

Hey that's great Leonard, tell us the whole story will ya? Where is that thread anyway? did you update it? because I remember the thread and there was not any information that I saw that said that this marine was not guilty of doing anything illegal. Yeah they didn't find anything in his home but does that mean the search was not warranted?
But if you have some new info that shows that the police had a search warrant that was unjustified could you please post it here.
I mean seriously Leonard if you are going to site this case as some kind of precedent then you must have info that proves this marine did nothing at all to cause law enforcement to seek out a judge and obtain a warrant.

The police were exonerated because the Marine was startled, was defending his family and had a gun, but there was nothing in the house that was illegal.

There is a thread here that goes into the problems with this young veterans death, given the amount of time given from the initial knock on the door, the breaking in leading to his death and the lack of time allowing the guy to understand what this was about is really questionable, not to mention not letting the medical people in to him.

The fact that the public now finds this acceptable behaviour by law enforcement leaves a sour taste in my mouth. We should all be considered innocent until proven otherwise not, like in the old west shoot first and ask questions later.

Here is the story;
http://abcnews.go.com/US/arizona-swat-te...d=13842029

Reply
#34


Quote:The police were exonerated because the Marine was startled, was defending his family and had a gun, but there was nothing in the house that was illegal.

backslide much Leonard? You said If you remember he was killed and the SWAT team was found innocent of any wrongdoing


Now you revised that to say they didn't FIND anything illegal. I have not disputed that fact


Quote:There is a thread here that goes into the problems with this young veterans death, given the amount of time given from the initial knock on the door, the breaking in leading to his death and the lack of time allowing the guy to understand what this was about is really questionable, not to mention not letting the medical people in to him.

What the SWAT team did is not relevant to you claiming he was innocent. You used this story to explain to BZ what can happen to an innocent person.

You don't freaking know that this guy was innocent. If you want to post another link to the story then post one that proves the cops had no right to get a warrant. Post one that proves the guy was innocent.









[/quote]

Reply
#35
If he was a suspect he must be guilty of something. NinjaNinjaNinja
Reply
#36
Quote:not to mention not letting the medical people in to him.

I think that's a crock. They put over 60 bullets in to this poor guy and somehow the media wants us to believe that the cops let the guy die because they didn't let the EMT people in the house in time?

Reply
#37
(07-18-2011, 06:57 PM)PonderThis Wrote: If he was a suspect he must be guilty of something. NinjaNinjaNinja

But I have NEVER said that.


Or you can say that since they didn't find anything illegal in his house he must be innocent. Which is EXACTLY what I'm hearing from Leonard.
Reply
#38
That's exactly how I feel, too. In this country we're supposed to believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Police killed an innocent man, the evidence is clear. Lacking a conviction of any sort, he's innocent. Why are you so willing to throw away this basic bit of democracy, that's more the question here.
Reply
#39
(07-18-2011, 07:02 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(07-18-2011, 06:57 PM)PonderThis Wrote: If he was a suspect he must be guilty of something. NinjaNinjaNinja

But I have NEVER said that.

In those exact words, no.

Reply
#40
(07-18-2011, 07:03 PM)PonderThis Wrote: That's exactly how I feel, too. In this country we're supposed to believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Police killed an innocent man, the evidence is clear. Lacking a conviction of any sort, he's innocent. Why are you so willing to throw away this basic bit of democracy, that's more the question here.

their is ZERO evidence that this guy was innocent. YOU don't know he was innocent. MAYBE the cops had the wrong freaking address on their search warrant. MAYBE the guy was involved with a gang of thieves that dressed up like cops and robbed people like they claimed.

NEITHER ONE OF US KNOW!!!!!!

I'm not throwing away democracy by ASSUMING the police had no right to execute a search warrant. I don't know either way.YET!

YOU clowns are the ones assuming the cops were all wrong and the guy was totally innocent.

Quote: Police killed an innocent man, the evidence is clear. Lacking a conviction of any sort, he's innocent

Good grief Ponder read what you just said, it's a lame comment, with that logic the SF police who today shot and killed a man who was firing at them also killed an innocent man.
Yeah people are technically innocent until they go to court but that sure as hell does not mean they are not breaking the law.

How do you know that the cops don't have an ongoing investigation and until them they won't release any information?






Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)