Pick and choose. I then go on to say
"Now they can just shove a $50 tracker under your bumper and call it a day. At that price, why not use them whenever possible, even for no good reason?" That was sarcasm, but probably not far off from someone's thinking. If you are going to spend the resources of 100 agents to tail one person, you had better be able to justify that expense. You aren't going to expend those resources on the roommate of the target's 2nd ex girlfriend on the 1 in 10,000 chance it might lead to something useful. At only $50 though, why not? And if no one finds out, it's free! Nowhere did I say either was alright. I was pointing out that limited resources have acted as a barrier to widespread, continuous surveillance of private citizens. I am going to assume you understand that and are just being difficult, unless you don't think that having access to such a cheap and easy tool will tempt law enforcement to abuse the ever-loving poo out of it. ----- "Because I can lie beautiful true things into existence ..." Neil Gaiman on Why I write. On 11/9/2011 3:39 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote: > The ease of which it can be done. > > If the FBI is going to assign 100 agents to tail you, they obviously > have singled you out for something serious. Those 100 agents represent > a large amount of resources. > ------------------------------------------------------- > > so that is pretty close to saying its ok if its expensive. vs. a $40 > electronic device. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:344001 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
