CDR: Re: police IR searches to Supremes

Steven Furlong sfurlong at acmenet.net
Wed Sep 27 19:20:58 PDT 2000


Richard Fiero wrote:
> One could argue that all electromagnetic radiation is in the public
> domain and receivable. However it is illegal to have equipment capable
> of receiving cell phone conversations because the rights of the
> telephone company and the rights of the conversants could be violated.
> IR equipment is capable of seeing far more from outside a house than
> just the wall temperature. This kind of surveillance is clearly
> invasive, in my opinion.

It's only illegal for the proles to have the cell phone
reception-capable EM equipment. The Public's Intrepid Guardians can use
it with no meaningful restrictions. And of course the pigs need to be
able to check on the activities of the proles.

All together now: It for the chiiiiiildren!

Pigs and, even more so, prosecutors and judges who perform or allow this
kind of invasion should be severely sanctioned. At the least, any case
which might _possibly_ have been tainted by illicit data acquisition
should be dismissed. Throwing the offenders into a cell block wearing
nothing but a sign saying "Bad Cop" and holding a tube of K-Y might be
appropriate for repeat offenders. Killing, as Tim suggested at least
once, is probably not a good idea, at least for the run-of-the-mill
violators. While in principle I might think it's a good idea, in
practice if a cop does something he knows he'll be killed for, he has
much reduced reasons not to go completely rogue.

Ta,
SRF

-- 
Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere     Have GNU, will travel
   518-374-4720     sfurlong at acmenet.net






More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list