Senator demands info on search engine subpoena

TalkBack 22 of 39:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

False Alarms

Hi, Jeff.

You said:

...just because nothing really ominous is rearing its ugly head now doesn't mean that it won't happen in the future.

That's always the case, regardless of the law you're talking about, which is what makes the argument invalid.

Example: "We can't let Congress lower the speed limit to 55MPH. Next thing you know, they'll want to lower it to 5MPH!" Or, "We can't let Congress outlaw child pornography. Next thing you know, they'll outlaw taking baby pictures!"

The laws don't work that way. The ability to do one thing doesn't automatically give you the ability to do something else.

If the government ever requests bulk search requests with identifying information, then it'll be a privacy issue, and I'll complain as loudly as anyone else. But arguing against one move because it might...someday...if no one notices...and the courts accept it...and no one challenges it...is just not credible.

Posted by: bhartman36   Posted on: 01/26/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• File System Auditor Version 2.0.8 ScriptLogic File System Auditor? allows administrators to audit file access, generate ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now