[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Freedom and Security
Rather than repeat the whole argument, I'd like to point out something:
> C. As has been pointed out by others, even if actual child pornography
> is on the Net, it is not in and of itself doing any harm to children. It is
> D. As has been pointed out, the use of child pornography is a classic
> "Horseman" (of the Four). In other words, the CyberAngels are using child
> pornography as a red herring for their even more objectionable activities.
> to learn the basic lesson of "mind your own business." Bringing goverment into
> the matter may both result in a violation of individual civil liberties and
> may result in increased governmental control over the Internet.
> >The Internet is a city - it needs 911 services and it needs Neighborhood
> >Watches. And neither professional law enforcement nor neighborhood watch
> >are by definition a threat to anyone's freedom. Freedom within the context
> >Freedom is under threat from two directions - from selfish individuals who
> >care little for the Community, and from the over zealousness of governments
> >who seek greater and greater control over individual thought and action.
The 'threat' is non-existent - it's no longer a threat, but reality. Why
do you think that the government was so desperate to slide the CDA
through? Folks like the "CyberAngels" are the best friend of an
intrusive government - they give them an excuse.
While before the CDA the government could read what they liked over the
net, they really couldn't do much about it, because if they did, the ACLU
and friends would've swooped down like a pack of starving dogs and
devoured them alive (not that that would've been a *bad* thing, mind
you). Now, there's no excuse, and nothing to stop them - they have the
*LAW* on their side.
The CDA just makes it legal. The government is actually very interested
in the USPS and others providing service over the net, because it makes
their jobs a hell of a lot easier. This "child pornography" argument is
just a red herring - there has ALWAYS been this type of thing around, and
always will be. I notice much is made regarding legislating morality,
but nothing is being said about the millions of tons of cocaine and
heroin that the government brings in and sells to folks. When people
realize that the drug laws and this absurd "war on drugs" is just to
drive the competition out of business - well, it's not going to be pretty.
And how about the enormous amounts of money made with the child slavery
rings? There is a LOT more of that going on than this "child porno"
stuff - just ask Interpol.
As to the argument that we need cops and such - well, we did just fine
for many years self-policing ourselves. The spammer and such was either
shouted down with mailbombs or just plain ignored. Now, Suzie Q. gets an
account, gets on IRC, and gets messaged by some freshman with no life,
gets upset, and suddenly it's a federal case, attendant with the press
smelling blood in the water, the morality cops like CyberAngels coming
out of the woodwork in an attempt to get press, and the government
rubbing their collective hands together, knowing that crap like this is
just one more small step towards a police state.
I heard someone the other day say "what do you call it when only the
police have guns? - a police state!" Made me think.
--
Ed Carp, N7EKG [email protected], [email protected]
214/993-3935 voicemail/digital pager
Finger [email protected] for PGP 2.5 public key [email protected]
"Past the wounds of childhood, past the fallen dreams and the broken families,
through the hurt and the loss and the agony only the night ever hears, is a
waiting soul. Patient, permanent, abundant, it opens its infinite heart and
asks only one thing of you ... 'Remember who it is you really are.'"
-- "Losing Your Mind", Karen Alexander and Rick Boyes
The mark of a good conspiracy theory is its untestability.
-- Andrew Spring