Go to Court Of The One-Eyed Judge
- Add a comment
- Go to Cohabitation -- Keeping The Divorce Rate Down
Well, hey, Saul,
with all these databases, facial recognition software, retinal screening (now being "tested" at the local airport), and national driver's licenses, we won't have to worry about that pesky little privacy thing, and all that.
As much as I love detective shows like CSI, Without a Trace, Cold Case, etc., they're disturbingly Pollyanish about the police having the best of intentions and only the mental cases and hardened criminals ever demand their rights, warrants for searches, etc. After all, if we don't have anything to hide, why should we mind letting anyone look through our closets?
posted by
Blanche.
on May 13, 2005 at 6:32 PM
| link to this | reply
Yes, fwmystic, they believe they have that right, probably an extension
of the attempted suicide laws. Can't have citizens killing themselves = less taxes. Can't have the public with private lives -- its unproductive, antisocial, and secretive. They might be doing black market things. (But left alone, those secretive black marketeers might create a new taxpayer. Go figure.)
posted by
saul_relative
on May 13, 2005 at 6:25 PM
| link to this | reply
Saul, you haven't been keeping up?
The neo-conservatives challenge you to find the concept of privacy in the Constitution. It started with Bork and continues with Scalia. In their minds, there is no concept of privacy. The state has an obligation to look out for your well-being, especially if you're going to make a bad decision.
posted by
fwmystic
on May 11, 2005 at 8:03 PM
| link to this | reply
Hey, mary_x,
ask the wrong person and they'll tell you there have always been laws like that. Ask the wrong person and they'll list laws going back to biblical times and as recent as those anti-same sex marriage laws currently in vogue. Ask the right person and they'll tell you the world's safe for democracy and freedom...
posted by
saul_relative
on May 10, 2005 at 7:16 PM
| link to this | reply
Thanks, Straightforward.
posted by
saul_relative
on May 10, 2005 at 7:12 PM
| link to this | reply
Saul,
Unfortunately, the "reasonable expectation of privacy" zone seems to keep shrinking, depending on what is supposed to be in public view. It's disturbing that there are laws on the books that could be selectively enforced if you happen to be the wrong person.
posted by
Blanche.
on May 9, 2005 at 6:15 PM
| link to this | reply
Couldn't agree more
posted by
Straightforward
on May 9, 2005 at 6:03 PM
| link to this | reply