Slashdot Mirror
Bookseller Purges Records to Avoid PATRIOT Act
Skyshadow writes "Vermont Bookseller Bear Pond Books has announced that they will purge their sales records at the request of customers . This would effectively sidestep typically insideous a provision of the PATRIOT Act which allows government agencies to secretly seize sales records. The store's co-owner, Michael Katzenberg, put it this way: 'When the CIA comes and asks what you've read because they're suspicious of you, we can't tell them because we don't have it... That's just a basic right, to be able to read what you want without fear that somebody is looking over your shoulder to see what you're reading.' Now if only certain other booksellers would show that same conscience, we might have something here."
Vote some decent congressmen in and maybe we can win the country back!
Does this remind anyone of Farenheit 451? You know, where they burn the books so people won't revolt against the government? This is a similar restriction placed upon our libraries and bookstores that silences any mention of a subpoena for a list of books a certain individual has purchased or borrowed.
I still don't understand how Mr. Ashcroft and his DoJ thugs got PATRIOT through Congress. Oh wait, I forgot! Our US Congress was so freaked out by September 11 and thought that somehow if they took away Americans' right to privacy and freedom from harassment that this world would somehow be a better place!
$DEITY bless $NATION
Where's a HERO tag when you need one?
The Patriot Act is a violation of what my father fought for in Korea and Vietnam, and what I stood for while in the military.
I am upset that people are associating the Patriot Act with conservatism. Violation of my rights isn't conservative, its facism. Fellow conservatives need to speak up. We DO need some stronger laws and enforcement tools, and I do believe this is a passing problem, but only if we speak up.
Some may compare our current situation to that during the Civil War (oxymoron if there ever was one) when Lincoln suspended Habius Corpus, but I don't feel the two events can be compared in this way. The threat is real, more real than that era, but not as localized.
Until then, destroying sales records is a legal way to not comply with this over reaching Act. Hopefully, others will follow their lead.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
They shouldn't be keeping records about who buys what books in the first place. I know what I buy, and I have the ability to look for new reading material in catalogs, libraries or via social contacts. Why is a bookseller keeping track of my book purchases any better than a government keeping track?
The CIA does not, and is not allowed, to opperate within the borders of the united states. It may be the FBI or NSA that comes looking but CIA is strictly for international matters.
And I highly doubt they would be interested in what books a person reads, but that's just me.
It wouldn't take much to add a provision (were it passed) to make retention of such records mandatory. Rather like walking in to see a psychologist here (Canada) and asking him/her not to keep records, knowing that they could be subject to subpoena -- they'll tell you they must by law keep records, with certain minimum information.
On another sobering note, in 1983 the Supreme Court of Canada allowed evidence of a newspaper clipping found in an accused's home as sufficiently probative to admit, despite the potential prejudice of propensity evidence -- aka: "See? He's the kind of person who would do this." He had been charged with heroin smuggling from Hong Kong. The article was titled: "The heroin trade moves to Pakistan." This flew in the face of all caselaw on that point, but has been followed since. The lesson being: what you read can be held against you! The case is R. v. Morris [1983] 2 S.C.R. 190, if anyone is interested.
I was, as a result of this post, going to create a list on Amazon cataloging a number of books that might make the government look at me a little closer. Little did I know, someone had already done just that :\
Here.[amazon.com]
Anybody remembers that AD that shows how america would have been if everybody was not free? The one that takes place in a library... Where a guy is gonna get arrested...
Remember that???
that some are opposing such horrible violations of our rights. I only hope that they do not pay a terrible price for fighting against this.
The truely sad part of this, is that this is not the worse. This admin has been not only stealing so many of our rights, but also taking away our ability to know what is going on. Public scrutiny of all processes (check and balances) is just as important to prevent abuses.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I think the problem is finding decent congressman. Remember, these people come from the population. The politicians don't suck, the population sucks if this is the best we have to offer. An ignorant population is easy to control. I bet the people who ran out and bought duct tape and plastic think the PATRIOT act is a great idea. Considering what it is the name, "PATRIOT act", makes me want to vomit.
I have com to the the conclusion that in general us Americans give up lots of our rights (think freedom) without a fight for the illusion of protection. We are no better protected than we were before this abomination to our freedom, American politics at its finest.
Think about that while you eat your red, white, and blue cake.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
==
Just because you're not specifically guaranteed the right to privacy anywhere, doesn't mean you don't have it. The only way you _wouldn't_ have it would be if the constitution specifically said, "the federal government shall have the right to invade the private lives of citizens."
--
http://nemilar.net - Not your grandmother's soup kitchen
Yet another reason to support your local retailer, instead of some monstrous mega-billion dollar international conglomerate that pays people minimum wages and operates nothing more consumer friendly than giant warehouses wherever rent is cheap. There's no "community" when you buy from these giants. Stroll down to your local bookstore (or any small retail establishment). You'll be surprised at pricing, selection, and customer service.
How about buying from your local bookseller and paying cash?
Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
Also, wouldn't a bookworm terrorist just purchase books in cash and give a false name and zip code? Kind of defeats the whole tracking thing.
That is why the USA PATRIOT act is so stupid... it does very little (if anything at all) to increase security and everything to limit the rights of everyday citizens.
Governments who attempt to have complete control over it's citizens never work out. They fall. I believe America will fall unless Bush 'n pals are taken out of office and we congress gets it's act together.
Real US patriots would never put the USA PATRIOT act into place.
-Derick
Two quick thoughts (in no particular order):
First, I've always personally associated a right to be secure in my person, papers, home and effects (Ammendment 4) to be a reference to privacy of some sort. Maybe I'm just weird.
Second, when thinking about privacy issues we would, I think, do well to distinguish privacy and anonymity.
Never disturb your enemy while he is busy making a mistake.
Lastly: get a clue and toss in some fucking line breaks.
That may be the case now...but the future situation may change.
Let's assume for the moment that you are right, and Ashcroft and Co. don't care what I am reading (and it is a good assumption I believe). That is not to say that in the FUTURE they wouldn't start scanning bookstore and library records, scanning for key words and tricky phrases. The order of events is now turned--they scan the records, THEN start pursuing individuals that have suspicious reading habits. I read up on the theory and evolution of the nuclear bomb because I find it scientifically interesting. I also happen to be working towards a pilot's license. Does this make me a terrorist? No, but it might raise a flag due to the key words "nuclear", "bomb", and "pilot." Now I have the Feds investigating me for no reason at all, other than my own intellectual curiousity. I am now viewed as "suspicious" for no reason.
I try to use PGP whenever I use e-mail. Do I have something to hide? No. Is my correspondence anybody else's business? No. You use an envelope when you mail a letter. If you have nothing to hide, why use it? Why not send a postcard? Simple answer: privacy. Just because you have nothing to hide doesn't mean you don't want your privacy.
It's far easier now to prevent such a precident from forming than fighting it after it has been set. An ounce of prevention and all that...is it a bit of paranoia? Maybe--I hardly think it is as intrusive or Orwellian as some make it out to be. BUT, you can't let it get that way. I'd rather be a bit paranoid and defend my civil liberties while I still have them than be complacent and have to try winning them back later on. You have to admit that our government isn't the most trustworthy or careful organization on the planet (Carnivore, lost laptops, Watergate, etc. etc.)
Would you rather defend your civil liberties or have to fight for their return?
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Why not quote the 4th amendment? It's very clear about what circumstances are required for the government to invade your personal life:
Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Indeed, the bookstore records should be considered "papers" and protected, so this whole business of "knocking down stovepipes" between government and private databases is FUCKING UNAMERICAN!
The language of the constitution is so clear and the intentions are so obvious, that it is equally obvious that it has been broken. You have the right to assemble, to say, pray, and publish what you will. You have the right to bear arms. You will not be put upon by the military. The government can't harrass you without real evidence you are a criminal. The court system will not be used to abuse you. You will have a jury if you are sued. Bail will not be used instead of a conviction. You will not be abused in jail. All of these things have been violated recently with perhaps the exception of the 3rd. I'm not aware of any involuntary quartering of troops, unless eminent domain aquisitions for military bases are considered.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Both parties together represent the ideal combination of ideologies needed to create a system ripe for mass-control of the populace. The Democrats don't really represent the better parts of the left, they represent the worst and same for the Republicans on the Right. IMO our system would be a lot more (Classical) Liberal if it were a 3 way control by the Libertarian, Green and Reform parties.
The people have on paper usually two choices. Two choices isn't a choice, it's a coin flip and a mockery of representative republican values. Both parties have tried for years to convince the public that having 10-190 people officially registered on the ballot is irresponsible because it creates chaos somehow. Having two people on the ballot is akin to having only one choice in most races. Hell in my last congressional election, we had literally only one choice for the House.
The average slashdotter is too sheltered or politically and socially immature to see most of those points. Who here thinks a lot of the Right loves the PATRIOT Act? FreeRepublic is a very right wing website and when the PATRIOT part deux was discussed, no less than 85% of the posts were calling for Bush and Ashcroft's heads on pikes out on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue if they seriously pushed it.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
Which politician is man or woman enough to lead the fight to undo these un-American powers? We know that in the Senate only Feingold resisted, although colleagues have become braver since. And yet the nation remains enthralled to right wing fantasies, driven hysterical by an irresponsible administration and its cynical Democratic allies who use fear to control the public as ranchers use cattle prods.
The hour demands a Lincoln; all we have is a Bush! Is there no one in office with love great enough for our freedom to save it?
longer than 3 months. It it's demanded for legal reasons, we don't have it. The deal is that for this to be legally solid, you must maintain the same policy for all users without exception. This means no .pst or .ost (offline outlook folders -oh god now you know I use MS). What's nice is: this forces people to maintain their email, and thus their jobs a little better. Of course, it's not the most popular policy my IT dept offers.
Companies have had this concept for years. Typical document retention policy is "useful life" - for contracts, it'd be life of contract + 6.5 years. For crap records, it's as long is it's relevent, then whack it immediately.
And the reason is simple - all this junk needs to be stored, which costs money, and managed - which costs more money. Then, if someone wants it (and you have it), you have to find it - that's a ton of money... then the lawyers etc. get to review it, and that's a fortune, over a freakin post-it note that would never be used in your favor, meaning at best it won't be used against you in a suit... more often than not, it'll simply provide the cause needed for them to request more documents.
Yick.
help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am
People whom we help get arrested also bought...
Amendment XI should have been, "Any leader caught violating any of the first 10 amendments shall be set afire as to cause unimaginably painful death."
Perhaps then we wouldn't continuously get ourselves into cycles of Constitution shredding/rebuilding. What's missing from the US Constitution is, quite frankly, consequences. There's no provision for punishing a bad, or abusive sitting government. What's worse, in today's surveillance society, a good old fashion revolution is downright impossible. Since when is it treasonous to save your country from your government?
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
Every order is organized by year newest to oldest. Every order is clickable to bring up the exact specifics of what was ordered: the number of shipments, the tracking numbers, what was order, it's price, and totals (shipping, tax, subtotal, grand total).
Attack the source problem *cough* Patriot Act *cough* not Amazon.com, BarnesandNoble.com, or whoever you want to smear because of some hivemind mentality.
If you don't want even record of the sale you need not shop at all, online or offline.
There is always going to be some paper trail; no matter if its a reciept, a CC statment, or the cashier remembering you.
A business in this era of consolidation purging it's records, thus disabling itself from selling you more crap in the future via Spam or (at a minimum) junk mail? The only way that would work is if they were only in the business of selling books. That isn't going to happen as long as they can afford a consultant who can whisper fairy tales about that mythic beast "synergy" in the CEO's ear.
Face it. Most businesses these days are not what they claim to be on their signs - booksellers, grocers, bakers. They're many businesses lumped together under one roof that are just as comfortable selling you your morning coffe or a cemetary plot. Thanks to consolidation, only multiheaded hydras survive. And sometimes, the customers suffer instead of benefiting.
"Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."
Here is your tinfoil hat. Thanks for demonstrating my point. What part of the patriot act lets them search bookstore records warrantless outside of a terror threat again?
..Then they came for me,
What exactly is your point? You seem to be acknowledging the fact that the Patriot Act allows the FBI to search bookstore records without a warrant to find out what people are reading.. Your only defense of this clear infringement upon of our civil liberties is "they're only going to use it in cases related to 'terror threats'".
So what? Anyone can become SUSPECTED (please notice this oh-so-important adjective) of being a 'terror threat' and therefore everyone should be concerned about it.
You still hold this notion that people concerned about this have 'tinfoil hat syndrome'. In your first post, you said it was because that this specific provision of the Patriot Act did not infringe upon our civil liberties 'one single bit'. In your second post, however, you seem to concede that you were wrong about this, but yet you still throw around this "tin foil hat" nonsense?
Wearing a 'tin foil hat' is a reference to someone who is extremely paranoid about threadbare conspiracies and imaginary threats. That is clearly not the case in this instance. The threat, as you have now acknowledged, is real and they're doing it right in front of our faces. If you feel that giving up these civil liberties is worth fighting ambigious 'terror threats', that's fine; make a reasonable argument for it. Please, however, don't throw around erroneous insults intended to stonewall debate.
-Arizona Bay
and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me...
"It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see..."
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No", said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd", said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did", said Ford. "It is."
"So", said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them", said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes", said Ford with a shrug, "of course".
"But", said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"
"What?"
"I said", said Ford, with an increasing air of urgency creeping into his voice, "have you got any gin?"
"I'll look. Tell me about the lizards."
Ford shrugged again.
"Some people say that the lizards are the best thing that ever happened to them." he said. "They're completely wrong of course, completely and utterly wrong, but someone's got to say it." - Douglas Adams, So long, and thanks for all the fish, chapter 36.
"It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it." - Eugene V. Debs
I've got an idea. The public is generally considered very bad at governing itself right? (In terms of making logical descions) Masses of people tend to act on whims, emotions, and whatever the "group" feels at the moment. Mob mentality on a grand scale if you will. I suppose that this is because people don't tend to think logically in these kinds of situation, whether because they don't want to think for themselves out of laziness, lack of time, or lack of resources to educate themselves. I don't know. What if a public service was started that during elections, say maybe.. the whole week before the election, every TV station has a voter education segment that reviews each canditate and issue in a non-partisian fashion. And I don't mean just a half hour election primer sitcom deal. I'm talking every channel, several hours worth of information. Does anyone think this might help?
"I murder kittens, robot. Whats it to 'ya?" - Badguy
To put it another way, the individuals most likely to strive for political power are those with a desire to control others and reduce personal liberty. Those who just want to live their lives in peace, according to their own will, are those least likely to strive for political power. And there we have the reason why, as time progresses, the US government becomes more expensive, more corrupt, and more oppressive.