Re: Things you can't take pictures of in public

["Dude VanWinkle" <dudevanwinkle () gmail com>]

This thread is killed..

please speak kindly of one anothers mothers and tithe regularly

that is all,

-JP

P.S. Larry sux

On 2/20/06, Larry/Spamhaus <lr () spamhaus org> wrote:
> At 09:34 PM 2/20/06 -0500, Larry Seltzer wrote:
> > > > So tell me Larry - which statutes, exactly, said it was legal and not
> > abusive when the FBI hassled Martin Luther King Jr, and tapped his phones,
> > and all that other stuff they did?
> >
> > So we shouldn't have an FBI? Obviously these things are balancing acts, and
> > we've already suggested elsewhere in this thread how outside monitoring is
> > possible.
> >
> > > > You see, Larry, neither a wiretap nor a camera has any moral sense of its
> > own. They can't tell if they're being used for illegal purposes.
> >
> > Wow, that's like really deep dude. And I guess guns don't know who they're
> > shooting so police shouldn't have guns. And jails can hold innocent people
> > so we shouldn't hold criminals in them either.
> >
> > This is what your argument sounds like to me.
>
> You may have to listen to the sounds a bit more and deeper if you wish to
> get the argument being made.  Your parallels fall apart below the
> surface... "deeper" one could say.  Police guns do not target, injure or
> kill 99.9999999% innocent people.  Jails do not hold 99.9999999% innocent
> people.  Cameras set up to surveil the public do target and hold this %.
>
> Deep dude.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Larry @ Spamhaus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.