Re: Response to "SAFE bill and cutting crypto-deals"

[nobody@huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)]

Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 01:56:20 -0400
> From: Jason Gull <jgull@UMICH.EDU>
> 
>   We already have federal laws
> which make the use of a telephone or the mails to commit a felony into an
> additional offense, so this provision -- quite similar to obstruction of
> evidence, from the look of it -- doesn't seem at odds with precedent.

  Precedent concerns citing the fact that the citizens are already 
getting fucked with a 2" Green Dildo, so therefore there is a 
precedent for them to get fucked with 2" Blue Dildos.

>  Granted,
> there's the danger of the "slippery slope" -- that allowing any
> restrictions on crypto will lead to a gradual encroachment of government
> into other uses of cryptography. 

  I've never seen a 2" Government Dildo that didn't grow in an
expoential manner every time a Congressperson farted.

> However, whether or not it is a good
> idea or not, politics and previosu law seem to firmly support such a
> provision.

  I'll rush right out and inform Che Guava and the Posse Comatose.

  When Dr. Roberts is done helping Kent get the stick out of his
butt, perhaps he can do something about your cataracts.

Del Do