Re: "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail"

["Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>]

hallam@w3.org writes:
> There is a considerable difference between running a government and
> being an individual. It is not merely ethical for one government to
> read another's mail, it is a duty.

I am a funny sort of person. I don't believe that governments should
be able to do anything that individuals cannot. If it is bad for me to
steal, it is also bad for a government official to steal. If it is bad
for me to listen in on my neighbor's phone calls, it is bad for the
government, too.

I have no evidence that becoming a member of a government agency
grants one absolution from sin. By my book, murdering, invading
privacy, and all the rest are bad, and I see no reason to expect that
just because you've been "ordered" to do them they become good.

> By not taking adequate steps to inform itself of the Japaneese
> intentions the US suffered the loss of a substantial part of the US
> fleet at Pearl Harbour. Had sufficient resources been avaliable the
> naval codes could have been cracked in time.

I suspect that mass surveilance of the entire U.S. population by the
government could in fact dramatically reduce crime. Should we do it?

I suspect that I could substantially improve my position in life by
listening in on other people's phone calls and reading their
mail. I might even be able to stop crimes directed against my person
by doing so. Should I do it?

I do not mean to pretend that there is an absolute ethics. I merely
claim that I do not find in my mind an easy distinction between the
acts of a government official under color of authority and the acts of
any other individual.

Perry