 spewakR.I.P DadkinsPremium
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA
kudos:1 | If nothing to hide Then you have nothing to worry about. This is only of concern to the ne'er do-wells of society. 
--
The weekend is here, grab a can of beer!
|
|
 El Quintron... a faint odor of kerosenePremium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2 | The excuse of all abusive governments and surveillance hungry police forces... |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by El Quintron:The excuse of all abusive governments and surveillance hungry police forces... They have to do their job, which is to protect you. You can't hamstring law enforcement and then get angry when they don't find your car that was stolen or the guy who kidnapped your child. If you don't like it, turn your GPS off.
--
trafficcloak.com - pptp/sstp vpn services |
|
|
|
quatrixPremium
join:2005-02-11
Davie, FL
kudos:2 | reply to El Quintron
The whiny excuse of criminals. |
|
 woody7Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | reply to spewak
so you don't mind being surveilled on every aspect of your life?If I am a law abiding citizen which I am, I don't want my every move tracked by someone, and am tired of the " If you have done nothing wrong" line of thought.Also define ne'er do wells.
--
BlooMe |
|
El Quintron... a faint odor of kerosenePremium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy DSL
 ·voip.ms
 ·WIND Mobile
 ·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to Matt
Whatever. I don't even have a GPS, unlike some I can still read a map.
But all potshots aside... asking them not to create profiles on people who aren't suspected of crimes is a pretty basic right to privacy.
The old saw applies:
Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither. |
|
1 edit | reply to spewak
said by spewak:Then you have nothing to worry about. This is only of concern to the ne'er do-wells of society. I'm a law abiding member of the populace and I certainly don't think I need to have to the nanny government checking up on me at a whim.
--
Kilroy was here |
|
| reply to spewak
This type of response just always amazes me. Most often, it seems to come from the same folks that want the US Constitution enforced to the letter. It's either one way or the other, not both.
Today it's allowing telcos/gov't to monitor your every move without due process. Tomorrow, its:
"Spewak, we've assigned an officer to watch your every move, 24 by 7. Relax, if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about." |
|
 NiarlanExcelsiorPremium
join:2002-11-09
Manville, NJ | reply to El Quintron
Got a phone that was made in the last 5 years?...you got GPS then ! |
|
El Quintron... a faint odor of kerosenePremium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·voip.ms
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
| True dat, but still it's not the GPS I have an issue with it's the monitoring.
I can leave my phone at home (and frequently have to because the battery sucks ass) however as I'm not involved in any type of violent regime change, I really don't see how the GPS activity is emanating from it is anybody's business.
My original point still stands. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to El Quintron
said by El Quintron:But all potshots aside... asking them not to create profiles on people who aren't suspected of crimes is a pretty basic right to privacy. Unfortunately, that's not the reality of law enforcement and again, you're misconstruing your right to privacy. Creating profiles is perfectly fine, what those profiles are used for is what you should be concerned with.
--
trafficcloak.com - pptp/sstp vpn services |
|
 NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | reply to spewak
said by spewak:Then you have nothing to worry about. This is only of concern to the ne'er do-wells of society. Or those who disagree with the current political regime in office, whatever their views may be.
Or those who value their privacy and just don't want the government and their neighbors to know things about them that they have no business knowing.
Having nothing to hide should not be equated with being agreeable to sharing your information with others, as they are not one in the same. I have nothing to hide, yet have serious issues with this type of thing taking place. I have nothing to hide, yet do not plan to answer any questions other than "number of occupants living at this address" in next year's census. Sometimes people just want to be left alone and have their privacy-- it's a shame that this country and it's LEOs apparently disagree with this concept.
Welcome to the new society, where all sorts of ills and disgusting actions are hidden by phrases like "think of the children" and "for your security".
--
To all liberals: I am NOT one of your parents, so get the heck out of my wallet. It's time for you to grow up and take some personal responsibility for taking care of yourselves, which means not relying on the government to give it all to you. |
|
NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | reply to Matt
I think we should be concerned with both issues.
The very creation of a profile about a person that includes personal interests, location, history of locations, contacts, financial transactions, etc. is a gross invasion of privacy. No government organization or private business should have the ability to do this without first obtaining the explicit written consent of the informed individual, or a court order.
Our society needs to create laws that clearly designate each individual as the sole owner of information created about them or on them based upon their actions (such as credit card purchases, travel, or GPS location history). Only then will people truly start to have a smidgen of privacy again.
Yes, this law should apply equally to government and private agencies. That means no more snooping and selling of data by phone companies, credit card companies, insurance companies, internet browser cookies, etc., etc. Make it a felony punishable by up to $100,000 fine or 10 years imprisonment for each offense to invade our privacy.
--
To all liberals: I am NOT one of your parents, so get the heck out of my wallet. It's time for you to grow up and take some personal responsibility for taking care of yourselves, which means not relying on the government to give it all to you. |
|
El Quintron... a faint odor of kerosenePremium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·voip.ms
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to Matt
said by Matt:Creating profiles is perfectly fine, what those profiles are used for is what you should be concerned with. Bullshit. Profiling basically leads to greater prosecution of the profiled subject plain and simple.
quote:
As criminologist Katheryn Russell, University of Maryland, College Park, puts it, "The high number of blacks arrested are partially the result of police targeting them in the first place."
I don't buy, profiling may lead to potential perpetrators caught but what it will surely lead to is a greater amount of arrests of individuals that match said enforcement officer's pre-existing bias. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by El Quintron:I don't buy, profiling may lead to potential perpetrators caught but what it will surely lead to is a greater amount of arrests of individuals that match said enforcement officer's pre-existing bias. Sometimes biases are based upon facts. In the mid '90s black-on-black crime was at record levels. Jesse Jackson said: "There is nothing more painful to me ... than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved."
Did he feel pained for profiling white people as not a threat? Or, pained that blacks (at that unfortunate time) were creating such a stigma for themselves?
I'm sure it was the latter. But, if we (whites) make similar, rational judgments, we beat ourselves up for being so insensitive.
I agree that profiling leads to problems (even abuses). But, that doesn't mean some level of profiling isn't beneficial (and something everyone employs in their personal lives).
Mark |
|
NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | reply to El Quintron
I think we're confusing two issues here: 1) Profiling, or the act of building a generic description of someone and then investigating all people who match that description, and 2) Building profiles of people, or creating millions of data sets that pertain to specific individuals (like "All of John Doe's credit card transactions).
I'm OK with police profiling to a certain degree. For instance, I don't have much of a problem with police placing additional scrutiny on Muslims going into a particular building or attending an event, if there is credible evidence that a Muslim terrorist organization is planning some activity there. I don't think that this is a violation of privacy, or rights, or much of anything... it's just being smart about investigating and using your limited resources to play the odds.
I'm not OK with authorities building individual profiles on people without having good reason (like having evidence to suspect someone of committing a crime). Using people's credit card records, GPS location information, phone records, bank account records, etc. to investigate someone without specific and credible cause fits into this category. This practice is invasive and clearly violates what should be a right to privacy in our society.
--
To all liberals: I am NOT one of your parents, so get the heck out of my wallet. It's time for you to grow up and take some personal responsibility for taking care of yourselves, which means not relying on the government to give it all to you. |
|
El Quintron... a faint odor of kerosenePremium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·voip.ms
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:I'm sure it was the latter. But, if we (whites) make similar, rational judgments, we beat ourselves up for being so insensitive. I'd have to say that's very US liberal phenomena... I don't find Canadians tend be PC out of one side of their mouths and suspicious out of the other.
In any case I'm French-Canadian so you're dealing with a completely different animal.
said by amigo_boy:I agree that profiling leads to problems (even abuses). But, that doesn't mean some level of profiling isn't beneficial (and something everyone employs in their personal lives). Mark My issue is not with actual police work, it's with fishing expeditions.
With some of the responses I'm seeing on the topic you'd think a lot of a Americans are unequivocally ready to give up their rights for potential gains in security... which as you know may or may not every materialize. That right to privacy however will never be given back. |
|
El Quintron... a faint odor of kerosenePremium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·voip.ms
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to NOVA_Guy
said by NOVA_Guy:I'm not OK with authorities building individual profiles on people without having good reason (like having evidence to suspect someone of committing a crime). Using people's credit card records, GPS location information, phone records, bank account records, etc. to investigate someone without specific and credible cause fits into this category. This practice is invasive and clearly violates what should be a right to privacy in our society. Again like I said in my response after you posted yours, I have no issue with legitimate police work. I have issue with fishing expeditions.
Your above example large gathering of members of specific groups is valid.
Pulling a guy over because you know he's Muslim and you're looking to find something is weak at best and bigoted at worst. |
|
| reply to spewak
Everyone has something to hide. We're all guilty of something if you look hard enough. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to El Quintron
said by El Quintron:said by Matt:Creating profiles is perfectly fine, what those profiles are used for is what you should be concerned with. Bullshit. Profiling basically leads to greater prosecution of the profiled subject plain and simple. quote:
As criminologist Katheryn Russell, University of Maryland, College Park, puts it, "The high number of blacks arrested are partially the result of police targeting them in the first place."
I don't buy, profiling may lead to potential perpetrators caught but what it will surely lead to is a greater amount of arrests of individuals that match said enforcement officer's pre-existing bias. How in the hell are you making the leap from logging GPS locations to racial profiling?
--
trafficcloak.com - pptp/sstp vpn services |
|
