3 ms·

What a terrible article. Excerpt: They have created a system that is a free-for-all for criminals So we should give up all rights to privacy to help catch cri

What a terrible article. Excerpt: They have created a system that is a free-for-all for criminals So we should give up all rights to privacy to help catch criminals? What concerns me about this is companies marketing something expressly to allow people to place themselves beyond the law Maybe that says more about your laws than the desire for privacy?

MCRed 12y ago
My sympathies for the FBI's concern about people being "beyond the law" is lessened a great deal given the past decade of revelations of illegal actions at FBI forensic centers, and the complete lack of prosecutions, not to mention the NSA spying, etc. Even the TSA is in violation of the law (fourth amendment protects against search without warrant, USC 18-242 makes violating that a federal crime, and a felony if done while armed.) I'd like to see the government stop being "beyond the law".
- pyromine 12y ago
  Okay the TSA argument is brought up all the time, and the overall consensus as that you are voluntarily giving up your fourth amendment rights by consenting to the search.
  - mikeash 12y ago
    Which is nonsense. I don't voluntarily and implicitly give up constitutional rights just because I chose a particular mode of transportation. Even if there was some sort of magic implication, surely I could cancel this out by loudly declaring "I decline to forfeit my Fourth Amendment rights and I do not consent to a search".
  - dmix 12y ago
    But failure to comply = restrictions of freedom of travel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unit... It is not voluntary for airports to use TSA. Therefore you have no alternative options when it comes to air travel. Saying traveling by ground is an adequate alternative is nonsense.
eli 12y ago
Including quotes detailing a position you disagree with doesn't make an article terrible.
- scintill76 12y ago
  And they're not even the words of the author, they're a law professor and FBI Director. Necessary opinions from experts and subjects of the story. It would be a terrible article if they were absent.
jcoder 12y ago
> What a terrible article Those are quotes from interview subjects, not editorialization. If the subject's opinion is horrible, you want that to show through in the article.
- ganeumann 12y ago
  The interesting thing is that they're quotes from an NYU law professor who was the "top lawyer" for the FBI from 2011 to 2013. I do wish the reporter had asked him what responsibility he felt for so abusing the public trust that corporate America (of all possible parties!) felt they needed to respond in a way that could seriously raise the hackles of the federal government. When people abuse the trust put in them, they deserve to lose that trust.
baddox 12y ago
What's next?! Requiring warrants to search criminals' homes? Giving criminals jury trials? Banning cruel and unusual punishment of criminals?
- sitkack 12y ago
  Criminals shouldn't be able to use our freedoms against us. Accused criminals use our system of justice and freedom as shield that only weakens America further.

MCRed 12y ago

My sympathies for the FBI's concern about people being "beyond the law" is lessened a great deal given the past decade of revelations of illegal actions at FBI forensic centers, and the complete lack of prosecutions, not to mention the NSA spying, etc. Even the TSA is in violation of the law (fourth amendment protects against search without warrant, USC 18-242 makes violating that a federal crime, and a felony if done while armed.) I'd like to see the government stop being "beyond the law".

pyromine 12y ago
Okay the TSA argument is brought up all the time, and the overall consensus as that you are voluntarily giving up your fourth amendment rights by consenting to the search.
- mikeash 12y ago
  Which is nonsense. I don't voluntarily and implicitly give up constitutional rights just because I chose a particular mode of transportation. Even if there was some sort of magic implication, surely I could cancel this out by loudly declaring "I decline to forfeit my Fourth Amendment rights and I do not consent to a search".
- dmix 12y ago
  But failure to comply = restrictions of freedom of travel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unit... It is not voluntary for airports to use TSA. Therefore you have no alternative options when it comes to air travel. Saying traveling by ground is an adequate alternative is nonsense.

eli 12y ago

Including quotes detailing a position you disagree with doesn't make an article terrible.

scintill76 12y ago
And they're not even the words of the author, they're a law professor and FBI Director. Necessary opinions from experts and subjects of the story. It would be a terrible article if they were absent.

jcoder 12y ago

> What a terrible article Those are quotes from interview subjects, not editorialization. If the subject's opinion is horrible, you want that to show through in the article.

ganeumann 12y ago
The interesting thing is that they're quotes from an NYU law professor who was the "top lawyer" for the FBI from 2011 to 2013. I do wish the reporter had asked him what responsibility he felt for so abusing the public trust that corporate America (of all possible parties!) felt they needed to respond in a way that could seriously raise the hackles of the federal government. When people abuse the trust put in them, they deserve to lose that trust.

baddox 12y ago

What's next?! Requiring warrants to search criminals' homes? Giving criminals jury trials? Banning cruel and unusual punishment of criminals?

sitkack 12y ago
Criminals shouldn't be able to use our freedoms against us. Accused criminals use our system of justice and freedom as shield that only weakens America further.