Slashdot Mirror

"it will hand yet more power to the financial sector in that banks and related fintech companies will oversee all transactions."

Banks compete with each other and have to please me to keep my business. The real danger is the government. It already forces banks to snitch on customers, will gleefully confiscate "suspiciously large" amounts of cash, and are already talking about eliminating large bills to further discourage you from using cash.

While folks are up in arms about the FBI, the real threat to privacy is the taxman... Can never buy yourself enough civilization, can you?

One might consider that a signficant percentage of rear-end crashes are a byproduct of redlight-enforcement cameras, which cause people to slam on the brakes (unexpectedly to the person behind them) for fear of getting a ticket, rather than exercising judgment. This problem goes away when yellow light times are lengthened -- even one second is enough to almost entirely eliminate rear-end crashes at controlled intersections -- but that makes redlight cameras unprofitable, since they rely on not giving drivers enough time to exercise good judgment, typically by shortening yellow light times to the legal minimum (and occasionally even shorter).

Assloads of studies can be found here:

http://thenewspaper.com/

There was the case of the guy driving from one gun-friendly state to another gun-friendly state. Cops pulled him over in a state that was NOT firendly to guns (I believe, Illinois) with NO JUST CAUSE, proceeded to open his trunk, find said guns, and arrested him on like 50 felonies, because there were like 20 guns and ammo.

The guns were properly licensed and completely legal for him to posses in both the state he lived in and was traveling from and every state he was going to spend the night in his 3 day voyage.

The guy got something like 30 years in prison!!

I don't think this is the same story, but it's very similar: http://thenewspaper.com/news/4...

Chicago is getting off easy. Only $500mil in 10 years [roughly] = only $50 million a year.

Here in Edmonton, a MUCH smaller city, we were bled $30 million a year
And of course, with the same red-light-camera kickback scheme...

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/45/4506.asp

Hysteria, eh? Well, let's just drag a few facts out. Here we go:

o Straight-up misconduct

o Botched paramilitary police raid data

o Judge, jury and executioners in blue: The death penalty -- without a court

o Warrants "not required" data

o Seizure of property without warrants details

o $2.02 billion dollars in cash and property seizures for/in which no indictment was ever filed

o Other illegal horrors

Just a little information -- what we know -- showing our government at work, cavreader. Now, I don't know how you will characterize this information, but I know how I do: Directly and unequivocally indicative of a systemic breakdown of respect, regard, and understanding of liberty and justice that extends broadly across all areas of law enforcement.

Now, you want to talk nonsense about legal protections in a system where the vast majority of defendants are pressured into plea bargains against a completely uneven scale full of extra charges, almost certain financial ruin, threats of extended incarceration, and outright lies from the police and prosecutor, where the police don't have to defend anything in court -- and which can be, and at times have been, followed up by ex post facto laws increasing punishment after conviction -- fine. But don't expect me to take you seriously, because you obviously don't have even the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Montana outlawed 'em entirely, because of how they just naturally lend themselves to this sort of corruption and setting the public up to fail (ie. short yellows practically forcing 'em to get ticketed). Bozeman was all set to have an exemption but then Redflex whined about how they couldn't make any money under the new rules, and the state legislature decided enough of that shit and nuked the exemption. So... no camera enforcement. :D

http://www.thenewspaper.com/ne...
http://www.thenewspaper.com/ne...

Montana outlawed 'em entirely, because of how they just naturally lend themselves to this sort of corruption and setting the public up to fail (ie. short yellows practically forcing 'em to get ticketed). Bozeman was all set to have an exemption but then Redflex whined about how they couldn't make any money under the new rules, and the state legislature decided enough of that shit and nuked the exemption. So... no camera enforcement. :D

http://www.thenewspaper.com/ne...
http://www.thenewspaper.com/ne...

All sorts of documentation supporting the fact that it's all about revenue and not at all about safety:

http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/re...

http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/re...

All sorts of documentation supporting the fact that it's all about revenue and not at all about safety:

http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/re...

http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/re...

Still, red light cameras do serve a safety purpose. While increasing the number of accidents, they do decrease the fatality of accidents. Translating 40mph tbone collisions into 20mph rear end collisions.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/rl...

An example of how determining guilt is being misused:

Idaho Court Criminalizes Sleeping It Off
http://www.thenewspaper.com/ne...

I can't find the case, but there was a guy who was give an DWI for being drunk sitting near his broken car. Here's a similar case. If you have control (can find the keys) of a car and are drunk, you can have your life ruined by these laws.

OTOH if you mean prosecuting people who the government suspects might drive recklessly in the future (Minority Report style?)... it's to imagine how that wouldn't be seen as a loss of freedom.

It happens though. See laws about 'in actual control' with respect for DUI. They've prosecuted people for things like sleeping in the back seat when they have the car keys in their pocket. New Mexico recently overturned that, reasoning that it actually encourages drunks to drive home, as there's less chance of being caught compared to sitting in a parking lot for ~8 hours until they sober up. It's still law of the land in at least 12 states though, so yeah.

Note: "actual physical control" was originally intended to allow law enforcement to penalize people who actually did drive, but the police did not catch them driving - such as they had been in an accident, passed out on the side of the highway, or made it to their destination.

in Missouri the state supreme court ruled against Springfield, MO for the installation and operation of red light cameras. Unfortunately, this fact is not well known and there are other operations in the state. If you get a red light camera based ticket in Missouri, don't pay it.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/30/3067.asp

The post is wholly incorrect. The Missouri State Supreme Court ruled against Springfield, MO for the lack of adjudication. The city was issuing red light camera tickets but the tickets were not handled by the court system. Instead the city treated the tickets like a tax bill while still passing along it's 'judgement' against you to the state DMV. People who received the tickets were denied their day in court and were not allowed to present evidence in their defense. The city simply considered itself 100% right. Add to that the cameras themselves were low resolution and did not have a polarizing filter that allowed seeing through windshields. So most picture were just of the license plate and did not contain any evidence on who was driving the vehicle.

The person who sued the city was a state highway patrol officer who received one of these tickets.

Also, Springfield shortened their yellow lights in an effort to "standardize"- http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/17/1759.asp

in Missouri the state supreme court ruled against Springfield, MO for the installation and operation of red light cameras. Unfortunately, this fact is not well known and there are other operations in the state. If you get a red light camera based ticket in Missouri, don't pay it.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/30/3067.asp

The problem with speed scameras is that they really are not about safety. A wise man once said. "measure what is important, not what is easy to measure". It is easy to measure speed, that doesn't mean that micro managing this is a good idea. It is not. Speed scamera side is not interested in safety (beyond the talking points). They don't care if you are guilty or innocent. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/40/4009.asp don't care if they make mistakes, unless it makes the press like this one out of Baltimore. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-12-14/news/bs-md-speed-camera-error-rate-20121214_1_camera-tickets-camera-contractor-xerox-state don't even care if you are not speeding. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/the_18mph_taxi_driver_clocked_doing_50mph_by_misfiring_speed_camera_1_1831308 They will even issue a ticket on speeding at 0 mph! http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-12-12/news/bs-md-speed-camera-stopped-car-20121212_1_potential-citation-xerox-state-camera-ticket Heck, they have gotten to the point of not just 1 km/h tickets http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/32/3266.asp Quote: Vehicle owners have begun to protest after receiving 45 euro (US $58) tickets for driving as little as 61 km/h (38 MPH) in a 60 zone -- just 1 km/h or sixth-tenths of a mile-per-hour over the limit. The camera in question is positioned just a few yards away from a sign that lowers the limit on the road from 90 km/h (56 MPH) to 60, Varese Notizie reported. Vendors have in Europe now citing for driving UNDER the speed limit. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/35/3523.asp The speed scamera are a tax. On those who say "big" deal, so they go "after" those "car" drivers, REALIZE that this style of enforcement will creep outside of cars. Already there have been speed scamera tickets to bike riders. http://www.banthecams.org/Speed-Camera-News/poland-naked-speed-camera-protester-fined-315-bike-riders-in-poland-are-cited-by-speed-scameras.html Scameras are about petty enforcement to make dollars, NOT safety. Safety is pulling over a dangerous driver, not sending a bill weeks later to benefit a private company. www.motorists.org www.banthecams.org camerafraud on Facebook.

The problem with speed scameras is that they really are not about safety. A wise man once said. "measure what is important, not what is easy to measure". It is easy to measure speed, that doesn't mean that micro managing this is a good idea. It is not. Speed scamera side is not interested in safety (beyond the talking points). They don't care if you are guilty or innocent. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/40/4009.asp don't care if they make mistakes, unless it makes the press like this one out of Baltimore. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-12-14/news/bs-md-speed-camera-error-rate-20121214_1_camera-tickets-camera-contractor-xerox-state don't even care if you are not speeding. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/the_18mph_taxi_driver_clocked_doing_50mph_by_misfiring_speed_camera_1_1831308 They will even issue a ticket on speeding at 0 mph! http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-12-12/news/bs-md-speed-camera-stopped-car-20121212_1_potential-citation-xerox-state-camera-ticket Heck, they have gotten to the point of not just 1 km/h tickets http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/32/3266.asp Quote: Vehicle owners have begun to protest after receiving 45 euro (US $58) tickets for driving as little as 61 km/h (38 MPH) in a 60 zone -- just 1 km/h or sixth-tenths of a mile-per-hour over the limit. The camera in question is positioned just a few yards away from a sign that lowers the limit on the road from 90 km/h (56 MPH) to 60, Varese Notizie reported. Vendors have in Europe now citing for driving UNDER the speed limit. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/35/3523.asp The speed scamera are a tax. On those who say "big" deal, so they go "after" those "car" drivers, REALIZE that this style of enforcement will creep outside of cars. Already there have been speed scamera tickets to bike riders. http://www.banthecams.org/Speed-Camera-News/poland-naked-speed-camera-protester-fined-315-bike-riders-in-poland-are-cited-by-speed-scameras.html Scameras are about petty enforcement to make dollars, NOT safety. Safety is pulling over a dangerous driver, not sending a bill weeks later to benefit a private company. www.motorists.org www.banthecams.org camerafraud on Facebook.

The problem with speed scameras is that they really are not about safety. A wise man once said. "measure what is important, not what is easy to measure". It is easy to measure speed, that doesn't mean that micro managing this is a good idea. It is not. Speed scamera side is not interested in safety (beyond the talking points). They don't care if you are guilty or innocent. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/40/4009.asp don't care if they make mistakes, unless it makes the press like this one out of Baltimore. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-12-14/news/bs-md-speed-camera-error-rate-20121214_1_camera-tickets-camera-contractor-xerox-state don't even care if you are not speeding. http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/the_18mph_taxi_driver_clocked_doing_50mph_by_misfiring_speed_camera_1_1831308 They will even issue a ticket on speeding at 0 mph! http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-12-12/news/bs-md-speed-camera-stopped-car-20121212_1_potential-citation-xerox-state-camera-ticket Heck, they have gotten to the point of not just 1 km/h tickets http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/32/3266.asp Quote: Vehicle owners have begun to protest after receiving 45 euro (US $58) tickets for driving as little as 61 km/h (38 MPH) in a 60 zone -- just 1 km/h or sixth-tenths of a mile-per-hour over the limit. The camera in question is positioned just a few yards away from a sign that lowers the limit on the road from 90 km/h (56 MPH) to 60, Varese Notizie reported. Vendors have in Europe now citing for driving UNDER the speed limit. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/35/3523.asp The speed scamera are a tax. On those who say "big" deal, so they go "after" those "car" drivers, REALIZE that this style of enforcement will creep outside of cars. Already there have been speed scamera tickets to bike riders. http://www.banthecams.org/Speed-Camera-News/poland-naked-speed-camera-protester-fined-315-bike-riders-in-poland-are-cited-by-speed-scameras.html Scameras are about petty enforcement to make dollars, NOT safety. Safety is pulling over a dangerous driver, not sending a bill weeks later to benefit a private company. www.motorists.org www.banthecams.org camerafraud on Facebook.

will get thrown out of court. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/22/2269.asp

Judge Ruehlman brought up this up in his ruling:

"The device was not calibrated by a certified police officer, but rather it was calibrated by Optotraffic, the corporation that owns the device," Judge Ruehlman wrote. "Remember, Optotraffic has a financial stake in the game."

There is also the issue of due process. When you challenge the ticket and exercise your right to "face your accuser" in court, your accused becomes a printed report. That means you have no way to cross-examine. So now we get into a serious debate of rather the process involving these cameras is legal or not.

I think the related news from the Louisiana Supreme Court is even more hilarious:

In his affidavit, Trooper Mire testified the money was bundled with rubber bands, sealed in plastic shrink wrapping, and hidden in the vehicle's floor compartment. He stated based on his experience, such packaging indicates a "substantial connection between the questionable currency and narcotics transactions." The claimants presented no evidence to contradict these statements made by Trooper Mire in his affidavit.

Relying on the reasoning of the court of appeal, the claimants contend the dog's alert is not reliable evidence of criminal activity because 96% of currency in circulation may contain trace amounts of narcotic residue. (...) Even if the claimants had shown a large percentage of currency in circulation contains trace amounts of narcotic residue, they did not show these trace amounts of narcotics would cause a trained police dog to alert.

Trooper Mire's affidavit also implies Tina Beers was traveling on a route commonly used to transport drug money.

Other factors to consider are Tina Beers' nervousness upon being stopped and her initial denial of ownership of the money. The claimants contend these facts do not prove the money was drug-related. While these facts alone do not prove the money is drug-related, they may be considered under the totality of circumstances to determine if there was probable cause for forfeiture.

That pretty much sums up their arguments. So we have a trooper saying drug users often hide their cash and drive this road, but there's absolutely zero evidence of any drug relation except the narcotics dog they brought in to sniff the cash at the police station alerted them. That the dog alerted them is considered proof that it is drug related and the government will do nothing to test the reliability of their dogs, they are faultless until you provide evidence to the contrary. Oh yeah and she was nervous, I guess lots of people carrying drug cash is nervous so that's slam dunk evidence it's drug related.

And this was at the state Supreme Court level, last year. Not that I generally carry $100k+ in cash, but sounds more like an arbitrary seizure of cash than anything that belongs in a civilized society. I mean really, all you need is a dog that can alert when its owner wants it to, have a police officer make some ominous claims on where the money might be coming from and all presumption of innocence is thrown out the window, you have to prove to the court beyond any probable cause that the money is really yours or it will be forfeit.

Cash can be subject to seizure without a warrant or other cause.

Read it and weep.

A whole bunch of arguments against automated ticketing, all in one place: http://www.thenewspaper.com/

The cop who signed off on this ticket is obviously not doing his job. This should at least be fraud, if not something more serious. Of course, there's no chance of the thug with a badge getting any sort of charges laid against him. There is no justice in the US.

Not fraud. Perjury. The cop is basically swearing that he witnessed the accused committing the act of speeding, and it is quite obvious that he did not. He lied to the court, in a round about way.

The article didn't actually state that the officer's signature constituted swearing under penalty of perjury. Every document I've ever seen that is such, also requires you print your name to remove the problem in this case "Duur, we don't know who's signature that is".

Of course the State of Maryland has numerous other problems concerning these cameras. First and foremost is that you don't have the legal right to force cities and counties to obey state law. Oh, and that includes when the officer's signature was forged. The fact that the city says forging an officer's signature is not contestable suggests to me that it is not actually perjury.

IANAL.

The cop who signed off on this ticket is obviously not doing his job. This should at least be fraud, if not something more serious. Of course, there's no chance of the thug with a badge getting any sort of charges laid against him. There is no justice in the US.

Not fraud. Perjury. The cop is basically swearing that he witnessed the accused committing the act of speeding, and it is quite obvious that he did not. He lied to the court, in a round about way.

The article didn't actually state that the officer's signature constituted swearing under penalty of perjury. Every document I've ever seen that is such, also requires you print your name to remove the problem in this case "Duur, we don't know who's signature that is".

Of course the State of Maryland has numerous other problems concerning these cameras. First and foremost is that you don't have the legal right to force cities and counties to obey state law. Oh, and that includes when the officer's signature was forged. The fact that the city says forging an officer's signature is not contestable suggests to me that it is not actually perjury.

IANAL.

I'm having trouble finding a news story for it, so this will be anecdotal and uncited, sorry.

Cameras in my town (near Philadelphia, PA) have been shot, run over and set on fire. I've heard of similar happenings in Texas so it wouldn't surprise me. And as further evidence that you either over estimate how responsible people are or under estimate how willing they are to protect their love of speeding our cousins across the pond in the UK have taken to destorying their Orwellian amount of surveilance cameras by the hundreds per week.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2849.asp

speeding? automatic ticket.

oxygen sensor broken, but you just ignored it and drove around with the check engine light on? environmental fine.

oh, you commute 60 miles one way to work? that's in excess of what the green czar said a reasonable commute should be, carbon fine.

tire air sensors reporting low air pressure? you're wasting fuel efficiency & gas, carbon fine.

didn't put your seatbelt on until AFTER you puled out on to a public road? seatbelt fine.

the possibilies are endless.

Legal precedent disagrees.

That happens everywhere. Burning and cutting the pole are the most common, but my favorite is this one http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/pix/czattack.jpg

This has been in the works for a while. And people have been improperly ticketed.

I'd actually want to see a very clear causal link between longer yellows and safety increases, because my gut tells me longer yellows would make people ignore them even more.

For the Google-challenged:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/02/243.asp
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2887.asp

You can find more.

I'd actually want to see a very clear causal link between longer yellows and safety increases, because my gut tells me longer yellows would make people ignore them even more.

For the Google-challenged:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/02/243.asp
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2887.asp

You can find more.

Technically speaking, it should be based on observed speed of people traveling on the road. However, standards have been weakened over time such that yellow light timing can be based on the speed limit rather than real-world speeds.

Source

The 1994 ITE "Determining Vehicle Signal Change and Clearance Interval" states:
When the percentage of vehicles that entered on a red indication exceeds that which is locally acceptable, the yellow change interval may be lengthened (or shortened) until the percentage conforms to local standards, or enforcement can be used instead.

There's a better analysis of how signal timing standards have been changed in the link.

That was the stated goal of Mayor Danny Crosby of Coopertown, TN. They then raised it again because that made things less safe.

What also helps is that unattended speed enforcement is illegal in South Carolina. An actual living, breathing officer has to have witnessed the violation, made the measurement himself, made actual, person to person contact with the driver, issued the summons, and collected the drivers signature.

Unmanned photo traffic enforcement is a big no-no in SC.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/31/3176.asp

It's been going on since 2008 in Michigan. Enjoy the link:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/news/are-smartphone-searches-legal-5603061

Passwords do not really matter. Their scanning device bypasses passwords.
the link about this:
A US Department of Justice test of the CelleBrite UFED used by Michigan police found the device could grab all of the photos and video off of an iPhone within one-and-a-half minutes. The device works with 3000 different phone models and can even defeat password protections.

"Complete extraction of existing, hidden, and deleted phone data, including call history, text messages, contacts, images, and geotags," a CelleBrite brochure explains regarding the device's capabilities. "The Physical Analyzer allows visualization of both existing and deleted locations on Google Earth. In addition, location information from GPS devices and image geotags can be mapped on Google Maps.

A few years ago I ran into a guy from Arizona and he was telling me how they put post-it notes on the traffic cameras. It actually went to court and a judge decided that the post-it notes were not vandalism.

Confidential Data not safe on SSD.

http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/11/02/17/1911217/Confidential-Data-Not-Safe-On-Solid-State-Disks

So the solution is to totally encrypt your SSD, which slows down it's performance as the CPU has to decrypt/encrypt everything on the fly. Good luck recovering data off the drive in case it won't boot.

If you don't encrypt, then a device like this or software can be used to probe your SSD

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp

I've had a boot RAID 0 of two 10,000 RPM drives for years before SSD's ever came out, mostly never used it's extreme speed, except when cloning or copying huge folders of GB's in size. Which was rare. Then the other drive also had to be just as fast and expensive.

So for most SSD is a waste, the larger, less expensive and more private HDD's are still the best value.

SSD's also have limited writes, so they don't lend themselves to a lot of data transfer and changes.

Get a 64Bit machine and bone up on the RAM, perhaps a 7,200 RPM or faster drive, that's the best solution for most users. Storage speed alone isn't a cure all for a fast computer as reads and writes don't occur all the time.

It is "defined", but the standard itself has been weakened.

The real problem is that yellow signal timing standards have been weakened.

thenewspaper.com covers the weakening of the standard here

Essentially, yellow signal timing needs to take into account human reaction time, the actual speed that traffic goes through an intersection, and time needed to clear the intersection. In 1976, the standard did.

1985 and 1989 revisions to the ITE standard made changes:
1989 standard: "It may be possible to use the posted speed as the approach speed." - Posted speed limits, as opposed to the actual speed that traffic goes through an intersection could be considered for setting yellow signal timing.

There are other changes detailed that impact yellow time.

I'm guessing the majority of nasty accidents at intersections result from people trying to catch the tail end of the light... esp when combined with people who are getting a jump on the green.

1) Long yellow-light durations. You'll speed through a light that's just turned yellow, but you'll stop at a light that's been yellow for a while. My hometown (Fremont) found that adjusting this setting reduced red-light running by much more than installing intersection cameras: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3436.asp
2) Long pauses between the moment that one signal goes red and the cross-traffic's signal turns green. This allows the intersection to clear, even from assholes who still manage to run a red even after the long yellow.

Ironically (but predictably) what seems to happens when stoplight cameras are installed is a LOWERING of the yellow-light duration...

Actually, lengthening the yellow light probably increases running red lights as people think they have more time to get through. The better way to reduce accidents is to increase the all-red time of the intersection. *citation needed*

Actually in a test done in California, lengthening the yellow lights by 1 second reduced left turn violations by 80% to 85%, and reduced straight through violations by 92%. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/30/3055.asp

using this perhaps?

Apparently having an iPhone will make it conceivable to know not only where you are now, but where you have been. Every day. For a long time. Couple this with those cell phone analyzers the Michigan police reportedly have. Think about it. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp
 

Your cell carrier already has all those logs. The police don't need your phone to get it. Then you know they're doing it. A warrant (supposedly) and they can get access to your carrier's internal logs and know exactly where you've been.

Two uses for that data: 1. Advertisements 2. Police

and of course the 3rd one that Apple do not want to think about: 3. Thieves can use it, to know when your house is empty.

It's not this file with their GPS that will help thieves, it's those stupid apps that post to Facebook and Twitter saying "BillyBob is at Starbucks on the corner of Main and Market with SusieQ!" Whee! That means BillyBob isn't HOME and I know from a status update last week that he has a new 50" plasma he just got from BestBuy! And from all the PICTURES he posts on his profile I have a workable map of his HOUSE and I know he lives ALONE and only has a lazy cat and not a vicious dog.

How many crooks will go through the trouble to leverage this file when there is so much low hanging fruit? None. The eerie thing about this file is a) What is it REALLY used for? I mean today. Advertising my ass. and b) Potential use of this data. To me it smells just like ISP log files and Dropbox back door encryption keys.

Each day I see things come about that makes the "fictional" big brother tracking technology shown on movies and tv like Enemy of the State and 24 look a little less like fiction.

Apparently having an iPhone will make it conceivable to know not only where you are now, but where you have been. Every day. For a long time. Couple this with those cell phone analyzers the Michigan police reportedly have. Think about it. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp

"But if you don't have anything to hide, then you have nothing to worry about". Ok, what about the reports I see where the TSA somehow finds out about outspoken people who complain publicly about the TSA? What about how they have people who watch for people IN THE LINES who are frustrated with being herded like cattle and groped like whores? http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/04/15/2051220/TSA-Investigates-People-Who-Complain-About-TSA

If you have no opinion AND have nothing to hide THEN you have nothing to worry about. God help us.

I'd like citations with data from you and Carnidlo. Please.

You are welcome.

Also see here.

I'd like citations with data from you and Carnidlo. Please.

You are welcome.

Also see here.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner.

Even if the funds were earmarked, they would still use them for something else. Arizona republicans think the law only applies to them other guys. They have already raided several funds that had specific uses. They don't care.

Photo unit snaps GOP party chief speeding 109 mph
http://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/arizona-capitol-times/mi_8079/is_20090508/arizona-dps-photo-unit-snaps/ai_n51711437/

Arizona: Judge Throws Out Political Arrest Based on Photo Ticket
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2801.asp

Republican hu? Yea, you're free to go. I like how that last article puts it up to being a "political arrest" over the fact that he had committed a felony.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/06/677.asp