Comments on: Surveillance and Ubiquity http://perimetergrid.com/wp/2008/04/10/surveillance-and-ubiquity/ Building Security in a Networked World Wed, 24 Feb 2010 02:00:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Grant Bugher http://perimetergrid.com/wp/2008/04/10/surveillance-and-ubiquity/comment-page-1/#comment-80 Grant Bugher Sat, 17 May 2008 20:58:53 +0000 http://perimetergrid.com/wp/?p=45#comment-80 The courts in America are not corrupt in the way that courts in many nations are corrupt. In many countries, barely-veiled bribery is a matter of course in most law enforcement proceedings; it's expected that cops and judges are bribed to the point that they're not necessarily even paid a living wage in actual salary. In the United States, if you try to bribe a cop or judge, you are very likely to go to prison. Sure, you might get lucky and get a corrupt one -- they exist, and a lot of people are corruptible if you have a <I>lot</I> of money -- but it's taking a very serious chance. I'm a libertarian; I agree with you that "victimless crimes" should not be crimes. However, a "crime" is not an immoral act, but an illegal one -- and these laws do exist, whether we like them or not. My point here is not that these laws are just; they aren't. My point is that somebody -- in fact, most people -- think that these laws are a good idea, and passed them on purpose. Even those people, however, do not want to live in the sort of society that will be created if these sorts of laws are enforced universally. We're able to live in a mostly free society, despite these sorts of busybody-meddling laws, because it's impractical to enforce them more than a tiny fraction of the time. Universal enforcement through surveillance and automation would horrify the general public, not just libertarian "crackpots" like ourselves, and that's what's going to result in real change to the legal system. The courts in America are not corrupt in the way that courts in many nations are corrupt. In many countries, barely-veiled bribery is a matter of course in most law enforcement proceedings; it’s expected that cops and judges are bribed to the point that they’re not necessarily even paid a living wage in actual salary. In the United States, if you try to bribe a cop or judge, you are very likely to go to prison. Sure, you might get lucky and get a corrupt one — they exist, and a lot of people are corruptible if you have a lot of money — but it’s taking a very serious chance.

I’m a libertarian; I agree with you that “victimless crimes” should not be crimes. However, a “crime” is not an immoral act, but an illegal one — and these laws do exist, whether we like them or not. My point here is not that these laws are just; they aren’t. My point is that somebody — in fact, most people — think that these laws are a good idea, and passed them on purpose. Even those people, however, do not want to live in the sort of society that will be created if these sorts of laws are enforced universally. We’re able to live in a mostly free society, despite these sorts of busybody-meddling laws, because it’s impractical to enforce them more than a tiny fraction of the time. Universal enforcement through surveillance and automation would horrify the general public, not just libertarian “crackpots” like ourselves, and that’s what’s going to result in real change to the legal system.

]]> By: Jennifer http://perimetergrid.com/wp/2008/04/10/surveillance-and-ubiquity/comment-page-1/#comment-63 Jennifer Fri, 11 Apr 2008 23:04:14 +0000 http://perimetergrid.com/wp/?p=45#comment-63 You have made a grave error in assumption -- that the courts in America are not corrupt. Such naivete and ignorance. You must not have had much experience with the courts at all. Secondly, everything you mentioned - speeding, drugs, are NOT CRIMES. A true crime requires a victim. The "laws" you are talking about are simply totalitarian to begin with, and designed to make "criminals" of everyone, so that government officials can make everyone afraid. Surveillance will ultimately work best for the side that has POWER and can enforce things at the point of a gun. Never forget it. You have made a grave error in assumption — that the courts in America are not corrupt. Such naivete and ignorance. You must not have had much experience with the courts at all.

Secondly, everything you mentioned – speeding, drugs, are NOT CRIMES. A true crime requires a victim. The “laws” you are talking about are simply totalitarian to begin with, and designed to make “criminals” of everyone, so that government officials can make everyone afraid.

Surveillance will ultimately work best for the side that has POWER and can enforce things at the point of a gun. Never forget it.

]]>