Re: Ray Just doesn't get it.

["William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <Pine.SUN.3.96.970613150817.23715K-100000@beast.brainlink.com>, on
06/13/97 
   at 02:16 PM, Ray Arachelian <sunder@brainlink.com> said:

>On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>> Ray you seem to be missing the point here.

>Bzzzt:
> 
>> Any state issued permit is public record. This includes your drivers
>> license and your auto registration.

>Should it include your address and phone number?

Yes

>> It is imperative that in a democracy that the public know who and what the
>> state is giving permits to (there whole other issue of wether the state
>> should be issuing permits at all but that should be left to another
>> thread).

>> In a free and open society the public must be able to review the actions
>> of its government.

>Then we don't live in an open and free society.  Do we have open records
>into what the CIA and NSA and such do? etc.?  Very few. 
>

Two wrongs don't make a right Ray. The whole CIA NSA thing is just a
flimsy straw man. All the documants being discused are on the state and
local level. They do not have "national security" that they can hide
behinde.

 
>> If Joe Sixpack has run over 20 people because he gets his kicks out of it
>> and the DMV still issues him a license the public has a right to know.

>But should the public know Joe's phone number and address and date of
>birth?  Gee, weren't we screaming this sucks to easily accessible Texas
>DMV records a few days ago?

YOU may have been screaming about it I was not.

>> If the state is going to issue permits on what people can and can not do
>> the it is crutial that the public can examine these records to insure that
>> the state is not abusing this power.

>See CIA comment above.  What of the likes of TRW, and health records?
>Should these be open knowledge to anyone who is a credit card agent or
>health insurance co?  If it is vital to have this info to keep the
>governments in check, why does the government have privacy?  If the
>government has privacy, why shouldn't we?  Neither do we, nor the
>government have absolute privacy, however, the government controls the
>information it deems to keep private.  Why should we not do the same?

>Should detailed building plans be made available of all buildings so that
>theives can look at them and break into banks more easily?  Perhaps there
>are reasons some of these things are available to the public.  Perhaps
>there are reasons why not all should be.

Look Ray I answered all this in my previous post.

You have two choices you can take the Libertarian view of a minimal
governement where all it's actions are reveiwable by it's citizens or you
can take the Statest view of big governemtn where all is's actions are
hidden and all "solutions" are more regulation and biger government.

The whole privacy issue is a strawman proped up by the government to
frighten the sheeple so they can pass their agenda. What's their agenda?
To have a series of privacy laws they can hide behind to keep their
actions hidden from public view.


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6KmKI9Co1n+aLhhAQE56wQAskQH55tdy1zmcVplKau06ZbAKyVKgaFb
L8PULoOlxTcmtWBoGv2Rcu6hnzc9K/w8g5v9GsRVsYl5WG/+nJRsV2r7E6LTBnao
glxAkzZcNjbM/ihD67XueXOn7ObbdNVMyeOv/FXMdUidlVeoKqJtXWlHpO7BYJjy
s+xyclr3EPk=
=nFID
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----