1
   

FBI wants records kept of Web sites visited

 
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Feb, 2010 02:37 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;126220 wrote:
But even if that's true, what's being done here is taking away the privacy of everyone. I'd rather give pedophiles their privacy than have mine forcibly removed.


As I said, I am not an ACLU type. I think that ACLU types place us in great, maybe mortal danger. I think your position is simply wrong. (And nothing would be taken from me forcibly. They are welcome to any information they think they require).
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Feb, 2010 02:39 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;126222 wrote:
As I said, I am not an ACLU type. I think that ACLU types place us in great, maybe mortal danger. I think your position is simply wrong.


Live dangerously, I say! Let me live my private, dangerous life, damnit!
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Feb, 2010 02:40 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;126223 wrote:
Live dangerously, I say! Let me live my private, dangerous life, damnit!


That is not something I say.
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Feb, 2010 02:58 pm
@Pythagorean,
kennethamy wrote:

And nothing would be taken from me forcibly. They are welcome to any information they think they require


If they asked for permission, I would give them the information they requested. But if I have no choice as to whether or not I'm under surveillance, I'm going to be disgruntled.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Feb, 2010 03:41 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;126231 wrote:
If they asked for permission, I would give them the information they requested. But if I have no choice as to whether or not I'm under surveillance, I'm going to be disgruntled.


Either they need it or they do not need it. Personal feelings have not much to do with it.
0 Replies
 
manored
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Feb, 2010 01:17 pm
@xris,
xris;126203 wrote:
I cant agree that policing the web should be avoided because it might drive paedoes to find other means to exploit children. We should search them out and destroy them wherever they ply their filthy business. In all honesty I would consider loosing my privacy if it meant children would be safer. I might fight the system if it exploited that allowance.
While I agree that we should get rid of all child-porn and abuse, I think the order is important. It would seem better to me to first catch the pedophilies, and then take out what they put on the internet.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Feb, 2010 01:29 pm
@manored,
manored;126496 wrote:
While I agree that we should get rid of all child-porn and abuse, I think the order is important. It would seem better to me to first catch the pedophilies, and then take out what they put on the internet.
If you could catch a paedo by examining his web record , would you? With millions using the web it has to be targeted interference by the law enforcement . Why would they look at me or you for no reason?
manored
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Feb, 2010 11:11 am
@xris,
xris;126498 wrote:
If you could catch a paedo by examining his web record , would you? With millions using the web it has to be targeted interference by the law enforcement . Why would they look at me or you for no reason?
Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about. It has to be targeted interference, therefore taking out photos before finding out who placed then doesnt sounds like a good idea.
0 Replies
 
prothero
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Feb, 2010 06:22 pm
@Pythagorean,
To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin
The man who sacrifices freedom (including privacy) for security, deserves neither and usually ends up without either freedom or security.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2010 05:49 am
@prothero,
prothero;126865 wrote:
To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin
The man who sacrifices freedom (including privacy) for security, deserves neither and usually ends up without either freedom or security.
Im not giving up freedom by my allowance, I'm increasing the freedom of children to live without fear of these sick bar-stewards. We all relinquish freedom of a sorts by just living. Can you drive without be monitored for speeding.
0 Replies
 
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2010 10:50 am
@prothero,
prothero;126865 wrote:
To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin
The man who sacrifices freedom (including privacy) for security, deserves neither and usually ends up without either freedom or security.


"The restraints on men, as well as their liberties, are to be reckoned among their rights"--Edmund Burke

:shifty:


They are both right of course. Quotes and maxims are a forgiving medium.
0 Replies
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2010 11:00 am
@prothero,
prothero;126865 wrote:
To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin
The man who sacrifices freedom (including privacy) for security, deserves neither and usually ends up without either freedom or security.


That is not what, in fact, Franklin said. What he said was, "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security".The terms 'essential" and "temporary" are important. Is not being profiled before boarding a place an essential freedom ? Is precaution against being blown up when you fly temporary security? Don't paraphrase Franklin and omit important qualifiers. Not cricket.
0 Replies
 
manored
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2010 12:51 pm
@prothero,
prothero;126865 wrote:
To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin
The man who sacrifices freedom (including privacy) for security, deserves neither and usually ends up without either freedom or security.
I think this is true in regards to government/society, but its not applicable to our daily lives. I dont agree with the part of deserving also.

xris;127021 wrote:
Im not giving up freedom by my allowance, I'm increasing the freedom of children to live without fear of these sick bar-stewards. We all relinquish freedom of a sorts by just living. Can you drive without be monitored for speeding.
I disagree, children are usually not told about the existance of such people, and they never get to know what the government is or is not doing to protect then.

I agree that we frequently have to accept losing freedom in certain areas in order to live, but the area that its dangerous to accept losing freedom on is exactly the area of privacy/information control. The less privacy there is and the more controlled the information is, easier it is for the government to control its people. And we all know it should be the other way around.

---------- Post added 02-11-2010 at 04:58 PM ----------

Jebediah;127048 wrote:
"The restraints on men, as well as their liberties, are to be reckoned among their rights"--Edmund Burke

:shifty:


They are both right of course. Quotes and maxims are a forgiving medium.
Indeed, quotes and maxims seem to have some kind of magic to then that makes us trust then... Just because someone is famous, doesnt means they are an autority on everything =)

Reminds me of "Dogs that bark dont bite"... WRONG!

kennethamy;127051 wrote:
That is not what, in fact, Franklin said. What he said was, "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security".The terms 'essential" and "temporary" are important. Is not being profiled before boarding a place an essential freedom ? Is precaution against being blown up when you fly temporary security? Don't paraphrase Franklin and omit important qualifiers. Not cricket.
Ah, thank you, this one makes more sense. The other quote only made sense interpreted this way. Still dont agree with the part of deserving though, I think the man will merely not have either.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2010 05:51 am
@manored,
Why should the fact that children are not always told of their existance, stop them from being protected from them?
manored
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2010 11:23 am
@xris,
xris;127421 wrote:
Why should the fact that children are not always told of their existance, stop them from being protected from them?
It should not, I was only pointing out that protecting then more wont make then fear less.
0 Replies
 
chad3006
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2010 12:33 pm
@Pythagorean,
The FBI also wants to know what books you check out from libraries (Patriot Act).

If you live in the USA and use any kind of electronic draft, check, debit card, etc., banks are required to check these electronic files against a "list." Not much is known about who gets on the list or why. In the banking business this is called "scrubbing a file." Out, out, damned spot!
xris
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2010 12:50 pm
@chad3006,
chad3006;127553 wrote:
The FBI also wants to know what books you check out from libraries (Patriot Act).

If you live in the USA and use any kind of electronic draft, check, debit card, etc., banks are required to check these electronic files against a "list." Not much is known about who gets on the list or why. In the banking business this is called "scrubbing a file." Out, out, damned spot!
These are dangerous times, would you not like to know your neighbours obtained a book on DIY explosives? We must be vigilant on securing our freedom but reality must be relevant.
manored
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Feb, 2010 10:56 am
@xris,
xris;127557 wrote:
These are dangerous times, would you not like to know your neighbours obtained a book on DIY explosives? We must be vigilant on securing our freedom but reality must be relevant.
The times have always been dangerous. In the past your neighbours could kill you in your sleep and easily get away with it, or you could just get an incurable lung disease and die.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Feb, 2010 12:26 pm
@manored,
manored;127895 wrote:
The times have always been dangerous. In the past your neighbours could kill you in your sleep and easily get away with it, or you could just get an incurable lung disease and die.
I will protect my own at any expense to others. If a danger lurks I will seek it out and eliminate it, I have no scruples when mine are threatened. I expect the same from my home security authorities.
manored
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Feb, 2010 12:19 pm
@xris,
xris;127920 wrote:
I will protect my own at any expense to others. If a danger lurks I will seek it out and eliminate it, I have no scruples when mine are threatened. I expect the same from my home security authorities.
Protecting your own at any expense to others will not bring you security nor peace, because that will make you a danger to others, who may just end up doing the same thing.

Isnt that how the whole terrorism thing started? Hum...
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/19/2024 at 02:20:56