3 ms·

Just make sure that all your drug users do actually dismantle their guns before they take any! People are responsible as we all know, especially in our modern s

Just make sure that all your drug users do actually dismantle their guns before they take any! People are responsible as we all know, especially in our modern society where we value our own individuality above society, ie. "I can use drugs safely every once or twice a year, as such I want it easier for me to get some, and that's why I'm asking to make it legal for everybody, no matter the disaster we know drugs cause on a society". It's indeed exactly the same, "I want to hide my messages with my mom from my government so I will fight to prevent the government from being able to decrypt any message at all no matter the basis of the court order, no matter how many children have been raped or killed, I value my own freedom above security of society". Basically, "the victims don't matter as long as I'm fine".

ttybird2 5y ago
"Basically, "the victims don't matter as long as I'm fine"." The victims here are these that get arrested for the victimless crime of taking drugs. A society is less secure if anyone who takes drugs runs the risk of being arrested. Also loving the unrelated "think of the children" argument.
- 1337shadow 5y ago
  Why would you be arrested for taking drugs? Because you're driving on drugs perhaps? The "think of the children" argument is based on personal experience, mind you, I sincerely hope for you that you will never understand the relation, ever.
  - ttybird2 5y ago
    "Why would you be arrested for taking drugs?" Because it's illegal? "The "think of the children" argument is based on personal experience, mind you, I sincerely hope for you that you will never understand the relation, ever." 1: I doubt it 2: You too, I hope that you (or your children!) will never be prosecuted for a victimless crime.
    - 1337shadow 5y ago
      If you take drugs at your home and don't cause any incident, there is absolutely 0 chance that you get arrested. The idea is not to have a camera in everyone's home to send the police every time someone takes a drug, the idea is to punish people who get caught taking drugs because they are causing incidents, such as car accidents, or highly risking to, such as driving after consuming drugs. Same with this law: if you're not seriously suspected of any felony then the state will not be able to request decryption of your data. I'm sorry to say my children and myself have suffered from a criminal that took years to catch, I hope we will fully recover one day but sincerely doubt it, but I'm glad this makes you laugh at least that makes two people laughing about it.
      - ttybird2 5y ago
        "The idea is not to have a camera in everyone's home" The funny thing is that this is basically what this and any other anti-e2ee regulation is about. "If you take drugs at your home and don't cause any incident, there is absolutely 0 chance that you get arrested." Yet it is still illegal and people are still being arrested for ordering drugs and producing their own, how curious. "my children and myself have suffered from a criminal that took years to catch" Did that criminal use drugs or end-to-end-encryption? Responding to your edit: "Same with this law: if you're not seriously suspected of any felony then the state will not be able to request decryption of your data." We both know that this is simply not true. "but I'm glad this makes you laugh at least that makes two people laughing about it." Not laughting, and if it is true I hope that you recover. I am just (hopefully understandably) a sceptic when it comes to anecdotes in this sort of arguments.
        1337shadow 5y ago
        > The funny thing is that this is basically what this and any other anti-e2ee regulation is about. Because you refuse to understand that we only want suspect communications, not all of them, and also that we don't want to break encryption to acheive that because the person might as well be innocent. > Yet it is still illegal and people are still being arrested for ordering drugs and producing their own, how curious. You won't until there is a problem that alerts the authority. > Did that criminal use drugs or end-to-end-encryption? Yes and yes, add much more. > We both know that this is simply not true. I disagree. Anyway, I've been prosecuted on wrong basis myself, and got out winner, I'm not affraid this is going to change. I trust my state, my police, my judges, who are independent and who will have to issue a mandate based on serious suspicious before they read my communications. Because, that's how present reality works.

ttybird2 5y ago

"Basically, "the victims don't matter as long as I'm fine"." The victims here are these that get arrested for the victimless crime of taking drugs. A society is less secure if anyone who takes drugs runs the risk of being arrested. Also loving the unrelated "think of the children" argument.

1337shadow 5y ago
Why would you be arrested for taking drugs? Because you're driving on drugs perhaps? The "think of the children" argument is based on personal experience, mind you, I sincerely hope for you that you will never understand the relation, ever.
- ttybird2 5y ago
  "Why would you be arrested for taking drugs?" Because it's illegal? "The "think of the children" argument is based on personal experience, mind you, I sincerely hope for you that you will never understand the relation, ever." 1: I doubt it 2: You too, I hope that you (or your children!) will never be prosecuted for a victimless crime.
  - 1337shadow 5y ago
    If you take drugs at your home and don't cause any incident, there is absolutely 0 chance that you get arrested. The idea is not to have a camera in everyone's home to send the police every time someone takes a drug, the idea is to punish people who get caught taking drugs because they are causing incidents, such as car accidents, or highly risking to, such as driving after consuming drugs. Same with this law: if you're not seriously suspected of any felony then the state will not be able to request decryption of your data. I'm sorry to say my children and myself have suffered from a criminal that took years to catch, I hope we will fully recover one day but sincerely doubt it, but I'm glad this makes you laugh at least that makes two people laughing about it.
    - ttybird2 5y ago
      "The idea is not to have a camera in everyone's home" The funny thing is that this is basically what this and any other anti-e2ee regulation is about. "If you take drugs at your home and don't cause any incident, there is absolutely 0 chance that you get arrested." Yet it is still illegal and people are still being arrested for ordering drugs and producing their own, how curious. "my children and myself have suffered from a criminal that took years to catch" Did that criminal use drugs or end-to-end-encryption? Responding to your edit: "Same with this law: if you're not seriously suspected of any felony then the state will not be able to request decryption of your data." We both know that this is simply not true. "but I'm glad this makes you laugh at least that makes two people laughing about it." Not laughting, and if it is true I hope that you recover. I am just (hopefully understandably) a sceptic when it comes to anecdotes in this sort of arguments.
      - 1337shadow 5y ago
        > The funny thing is that this is basically what this and any other anti-e2ee regulation is about. Because you refuse to understand that we only want suspect communications, not all of them, and also that we don't want to break encryption to acheive that because the person might as well be innocent. > Yet it is still illegal and people are still being arrested for ordering drugs and producing their own, how curious. You won't until there is a problem that alerts the authority. > Did that criminal use drugs or end-to-end-encryption? Yes and yes, add much more. > We both know that this is simply not true. I disagree. Anyway, I've been prosecuted on wrong basis myself, and got out winner, I'm not affraid this is going to change. I trust my state, my police, my judges, who are independent and who will have to issue a mandate based on serious suspicious before they read my communications. Because, that's how present reality works.