Patrick Kirk wrote:
> "...it must be held that third-party electronic monitoring, subject
> only to the self-restraint of law enforcement officials, has no place
> in our society..." Mark Roberts | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> What does this mean? Surely without surveillance, there can be no society?
I think the key element in that statement is, "subject only to the
self-restraint of law enforcement officials". In this instance, said
officials
have an unlimited right to monitor the general public and shit, which is
a
decidedly '1984'-type scenario. It seems to me that he's saying, if we
have to
be subjected to third-party surveillance at all, then it should be
monitored
and regulated itself, otherwise the complete invasion of privacy will
ultimately become reality. Which is fair enough, in my book.
Hello, everyone, by the way. I just jumped on the Freenet bandwagon last
night,
having heard about it through Project Mayhem. It sounded very fluffy, so
I
thought I'd have a gander.
http://www.pmayhem.org
... if anyone's interested.
THEM BUZZ
_______________________________________________
Chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
