Re: [privacy] Highway safety

["Dmitry Chan" <dmitry.chan () gmail com>]

On 10/23/06, Brian Loe <knobdy () gmail com> wrote:
> >  The same argument could also be applied to Airline pilots.  Should
> pilots
> > be allowed to fly folks around the country while impaired?  It is, after
> > all, just a "potential" to commit a crime.
> >
>
> Once again, the logic leaves me wanting... No, not airline pilots, or
> cabbies or bus drivers.

...because their intoxication may lead to the loss of innocent life, no?
And, isn't that the same case with the drunk behind the wheel of an
automobile who is *sharing* a highway with other drivers.

> Not truck drivers or tanker ship captains. All of those folks are subject
to company policies and government
> regulations.

And, what's the distinction?  Civilian drivers of automobiles are subject to
government laws and regulations as well.  Why choose one set of laws to be
arbitrarily more anti-privacy than the other?  Or, is it because you happen
to be affected by the one and not the other?


I guess the loss of privacy rights - even on the privacy list - isn't
> of much concern to anyone.


I still don't see any privacy violations in taking crippled drivers off the
road and punishing them for stupidity...but, maybe you have a bone to grind
with this particular law or your ankle locator is too tight and you're just
cranky.

--
!Dmitry
http://blogs.securiteam.com/index.php/archives/author/dmitryc/

_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
privacy () whitestar linuxbox org
http://www.whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/privacy