3 ms·

> today the government has the physical ability to break into my house and shoot me in the head for no reason at all, but they don't have the legal ability to d

by soperj 4y ago

> today the government has the physical ability to break into my house and shoot me in the head for no reason at all, but they don't have the legal ability to do so. Isn't that exactly what they did to Breonna Taylor in Louisville? Haven't seen anyone arrested for that.

undersuit 4y ago
Technically the police did have a warrant and legally executed it. Sure the recent scuttlebutt is that the warrant was created from falsified data, but at the time it was legal.
- soperj 4y ago
  So then the original poster was wrong?
- DerekL 4y ago
  Not just scuttlebutt. One of the detectives has already pled guilty. https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/23/us/breonna-taylor-ex-officer-kelly-goodlett-guilty-plea/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/23/us/breonna-taylor-ex-officer-...
tablespoon 4y ago
> Haven't seen anyone arrested for that. Now you have: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62427546 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62427546: > Breonna Taylor: US police charged over shooting death > Four US police officers have been arrested and charged over the fatal shooting of Breonna Taylor. That happened a month an a half ago.
- MandieD 4y ago
  Only once the feds stepped in, though.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > Only once the feds stepped in, though. What's that got to do with the actual point here, which is privacy that's infeasible through purely physical means can be implemented through legal means? As an aside, tech people can be annoying black and white sometimes, and do things like misinterpret imperfect solutions as literally no solution at all. DNA is not going to be protected by all the buzzwords we use to describe encryption systems, but that doesn't mean it can't be protected.
- soperj 4y ago
  No, I saw that a month and a half ago. From the article: "The federal indictment announced by Attorney General Merrick Garland accuses the four of civil rights offences, unlawful conspiracy, unconstitutional use of force and obstruction." None of them have been charged with breaking into her house or shooting her.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > None of them have been charged with breaking into her house or shooting her. You're missing the point.
    - soperj 4y ago
      No, I think you are. They are finding other ways to charge these people, they are specifically not being arrested for murdering someone. Breonna Taylor isn't an isolated case, but it's finally one where they're trying to get some kind of justice through charging these people with something. They don't actually believe they'd get a conviction with charging them with murder, so while it might not be legal in theory, it is in practice.

by soperj 4y ago

undersuit 4y ago

Technically the police did have a warrant and legally executed it. Sure the recent scuttlebutt is that the warrant was created from falsified data, but at the time it was legal.

soperj 4y ago
So then the original poster was wrong?
DerekL 4y ago
Not just scuttlebutt. One of the detectives has already pled guilty. https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/23/us/breonna-taylor-ex-officer-kelly-goodlett-guilty-plea/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/23/us/breonna-taylor-ex-officer-...

tablespoon 4y ago

> Haven't seen anyone arrested for that. Now you have: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62427546 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62427546: > Breonna Taylor: US police charged over shooting death > Four US police officers have been arrested and charged over the fatal shooting of Breonna Taylor. That happened a month an a half ago.

MandieD 4y ago
Only once the feds stepped in, though.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > Only once the feds stepped in, though. What's that got to do with the actual point here, which is privacy that's infeasible through purely physical means can be implemented through legal means? As an aside, tech people can be annoying black and white sometimes, and do things like misinterpret imperfect solutions as literally no solution at all. DNA is not going to be protected by all the buzzwords we use to describe encryption systems, but that doesn't mean it can't be protected.
soperj 4y ago
No, I saw that a month and a half ago. From the article: "The federal indictment announced by Attorney General Merrick Garland accuses the four of civil rights offences, unlawful conspiracy, unconstitutional use of force and obstruction." None of them have been charged with breaking into her house or shooting her.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > None of them have been charged with breaking into her house or shooting her. You're missing the point.
  - soperj 4y ago
    No, I think you are. They are finding other ways to charge these people, they are specifically not being arrested for murdering someone. Breonna Taylor isn't an isolated case, but it's finally one where they're trying to get some kind of justice through charging these people with something. They don't actually believe they'd get a conviction with charging them with murder, so while it might not be legal in theory, it is in practice.