They didn't even wait for SOPA to die...
- Thread starter Damocles
- Start date
SmarterthanYou
rebel
better to be safe and secure than free. right mott and dune? dixie also.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
I'm surprised no one mentioned Megaupload and the retaliation.
Why the fuck do you keep saying this shit?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
because you and some others here believe that rights need to be restricted for the public safety, therefore you prefer safety and security over freedom.
when the rights of one man/group can be restricted or denied, they can all be restricted or denied.
Prove it. Start by noting when owning machine guns became illegal.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
May 19, 1986 was the day the Hughes amendment to the firearms owners protection act of 86 was questionably approved. later court decisions made it so that any machine gun manufactured AFTER that day could not be legally owned by anyone other than government agencies and personnel. Any machine gun manufactured before that day, can still be legally owned provided that it has already been registered with the ATF and the 200 dollar transfer tax has been paid for. there are some other stipulations required to own machine guns that deal with local leo approval.
what this does is limit the availability of machine gun ownership to a ever decreasing pool, which according to ATF records is about 200,000 legally owned and registered machine guns.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
Dune, no response to the above post? you asked for proof, there it is.
How does that prove that I prefer safety and security over freedom?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you asked me to prove it by noting when machine guns became illegal to own. I did that.
this is almost as bad as the usa patriot act, if not worse
what happened to the 4th amendment
apple0154
MEOW
I've always maintained that secrecy leads to problems. One obvious example was AIDS. An individual's condition would become public and they would be ostracized. Misinformation and rumors spread. Once people came forward and society realized AIDS was not solely caused by certain behavior and that hundreds of people were subjected to tainted blood attitudes changed. Furthermore, homosexuality came out of the closet.
The problem with authorities knowing a person's internet activity is, in large part, due to the fact the rest of society does not know.
(Excerpt) In Communist countries, where the ruling class routinely dug up embarrassing information on citizens as a bulwark against dissent, the secret police never dreamed of an information trove as perfect for targeting innocent people as a full Internet history. Phrases I've Googled in the course of researching this item include "moral panic about child pornography" and "blackmailing enemies with Internet history." For most people, it's easy enough to recall terms you've searched that could be taken out of context, and of course there are lots of Americans who do things online that are perfectly legal, but would be embarrassing if made public even with context: medical problems and adult pornography are only the beginning. (End)
Imagine how that would change if everyone was aware of everyone else's activity. As the author reports he visited sites which could be taken out of context. Is a person who reads an article concerning a terrorist with a bomb searching for bomb-making info? Is the person reading a news article about a pedophile hoping to discover how the individual got caught so they can avoid such behavior? We are living in a world flooded with information but know nothing about individuals. Are we prejudice due to our lack of knowledge concerning others? Isn't that the root of prejudice, not knowing enough about some thing or some one? If it weren't for secrecy there would be no blackmail.
How do we advance as a society when individual thoughts and actions are not shared? How many people conceal activities believing they are the only one doing such things or believing they are a small minority?
Regardless of privacy laws there is always someone who knows the actions of another and the fewer who know results in the ones knowing holding a correspondingly greater proportion of power. Privacy laws work for the benefit of those in power and to the detriment of individuals as those in power will always have ways to access information.