funsec mailing list archives
Re: [privacy] Highway safety
From: "Brian Loe" <knobdy () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 09:10:46 -0500
On 10/23/06, Dmitry Chan <dmitry.chan () gmail com> wrote:
And, isn't that the same case with the drunk behind the wheel of an automobile who is *sharing* a highway with other drivers.No.I don't agree. When I drive, I'm in a social contract with the other drivers on the road. I'm not free to nut up and neither are they.
THAT I agree with. Venturing anywhere in public means you have accepted your end of a social contract.
If one of those other drivers is drunk, then they deserve a DUI. I don't think the cops should wait until they actually harm someone before arresting them. But, we disagree I'm guessing.
Yes, we do. Perhaps we could agree if we could agree on what constitutes a DUI and probable cause for testing such. For now, the unintended consequences of current laws are far too great and the laws themselves too broad.
I would hazard to guess that I'm affected by both - but until I've committed a crime, I don't believe I need to deal with the police.In a perfect world, yes. In a world with criminals, it's not realistic.
Sure it is, I'm not a criminal and only criminals - and those in need of help - should have to deal with police.
Uhmm...no. Not only have I never gotten a DUI/DWI, I've never committed a crime that would award me an ankle bracelet - but that's a common tactic of shortsighted folks. I believe it comes form a failure, on your part, to understand how anyone could possibly have a problem with a criminal law without first breaking the law.Nonsense. Drivers who are drunk are impaired and should not be driving.
Agreed.
You, apparently, think they should be allowed to drive until they actually hurt someone. That, imo, is truly shortsighted.
Well, allow me to rephrase then, they should be allowed to drive until they show obvious signs of being too intoxicated - and the proof of such should be on tape. Laws should bow to rights at every turn and as much as you may wish for it, you do not have a right to a safe life - no one can guarantee it.
Apples and oranges. There is no good reason (outside the outlier 'hostage-type' situation) where Crypto should be outlawed. There is a very good reason why drunks shouldn't be allowed to drive.
What about child porn? Or many other criminal acts that would certainly benefit form encryption - hell, terrorists, especially those who tend to leave their laptops behind when they leave their caves. I'm not disagreeing that drunks shouldn't drive.
ONE unintended consequence: DUI checkpoints. If you can't figure it out from there, well, go with god, I don't know. No one can help you...An inconvenience? Yes. Worthwhile? Yes, imo. But, I'm sure you disagree.
Yeah, absolutely. It's a violation of your 4th and 5th Amendment rights. _______________________________________________ privacy mailing list privacy () whitestar linuxbox org http://www.whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/privacy
Current thread:
- Re: [privacy] Want a beer at the pub? Have your prints taken, (continued)
- Re: [privacy] Want a beer at the pub? Have your prints taken Bryan (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Richard M. Smith (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Brian Loe (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Richard M. Smith (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Brian Loe (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Dmitry Chan (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Brian Loe (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Dmitry Chan (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Brian Loe (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Dmitry Chan (Oct 23)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Brian Loe (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Dmitry Chan (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Brian Loe (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Dennis Henderson (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Brian Loe (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Dennis Henderson (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Drsolly (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Brian Loe (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety David Lodge (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Drsolly (Oct 24)
- Re: [privacy] Highway safety Dennis Henderson (Oct 24)