Deliberation of "National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace"

An anonymous reader writes "Per the Federal Register the National Infastructure Advisory Council will have a public meeting (telephonically) from 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm EST on 1/8/2003 to deliberate on the National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace. 'Written comments may be submitted at any time before or after the meeting.' Details can be found in text format or in PDF."

Comments

freedom is the only thing keeping it running....

[codepunk]

Any programmer worth a grain of salt could take down the internet at any time and cause horrific infrastructure damage. Writing a worm or virus that causes extreme outages and infrastructure damage might take at least a hour or so to code. I could do it as well as most programmers I know could do it. On the other hand I know most of us would not like to go to jail for doing something like this. Is it a threat, why sure it is any of us could do it any time we want it is just a matter of if we wish to stay free or be locked away.

Re:Right to bear arms

[msobkow]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

In other words the army, the police, and the "weekend warriors" in the reserves. The reserves are essentially what a militia was back then -- people who wanted to do their part, but couldn't dedicate themselves to it as a career.

It is written in plain text, using the terms and language of the times, and was very clear about "regulated militia", not a free-for-all by the general public.

From Webster's Dictionary:

\Mi*li"tia\, n. [L., military service, soldiery, fr. miles, militis, soldier: cf. F. milice.] 1. In the widest sense, the whole military force of a nation, including both those engaged in military service as a business, and those competent and available for such service; specifically, the body of citizens enrolled for military instruction and discipline, but not subject to be called into actual service except in emergencies.

It's not a question of my interpretation, but of whether you're willing to accept the parts of the constitution that disagree with your own wishes. You always have to read historical documents with an eye to the common-use terminology of the period, not the modern meanings of the words.