Slashdot Mirror
Police Director Sues AOL For Critical Blogger's Name
Pippin writes "Memphis Police Director, Larry Godwin, is suing AOL for the names of the authors of the Enforcer 2.0 blog. The blog is rumored to be authored by a Memphis police officer, and is critical of the department, Godwin, and some procedures. Godwin is actually using taxpayer dollars for this and, interestingly, the complaint is sealed".
If the bloggers are leaking information that harms investigations then Larry is doing the right thing; if they are merely critical of Larry then they should be encouraged at their efforts to improve the police service.
I don't actually think there's anything intrinsically "technological" about this story, be it the fact that there's an anonymous whistle-blower or that the boss is trying to hunt him down, except maybe the amount of people the blogger it could reach. But, and yes I know this clearly is not the case, the Internet was supposed to free us and allow us to share knowledge and information freely and that includes opinions. Since that obviously is no longer here (If it ever was), I think it's time to find or create something else.
Because all you have really ensured is that the blog will get a decent amount of free publicity.
Yes, what you say is true, but you forget that this America! We are KINGS of misappropriating funds to defend politicians and law enforcement, and our legal system is all for supporting such practices (since it helps protect them as well). Screw what is right, what about the status quo!
Yes, this statement is perhaps pandering, but it's also painfully true (dammit).
The correct action is to give Larry Godwin as much rope as he wants. Record everything. Document everything. Ensure this pooled information is made accessible to the blogger somehow - someone'll know who it is. People who are upset make mistakes. Pushing them deeper into their paranoia and neurotic state of mind will cause them to make bigger and bigger mistakes. It's not entrapment, as nobody is making Mr Godwin do anything illegal, they're not even suggesting it. It would be his choice, with the alternative being to back off. He has total free will. Once he has done something openly illegal, provided immunity doesn't cover him, arrest him for it.Even if immunity did cover him, this is election year and politicians aren't going to want to leave a loose cannon in a public position. He'll be removed from office.
The result will not be a court decision (which never helps anyone) but will give whistleblowers additional measures they can take.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
In an infinitely long thread, you are absolutely certain to have at least one mention of every single concept, object, philosophy and idea ever known to humanity, because of the way probability works.
Only if the thread is irrational (just like you can find any combination of numbers in pi or e). In a nice, rational thread, you'll eventually get repetitions and the thread will loop back to itself.
I hereby present you Godwin's Law 2.0:
As the internet grows and Godwin's Law becomes more and more famous, internet discussions will increasingly refer to Godwin's Law instead of actually mentioning Nazism.
Though most policemen are good people... Most of these abuses are not reported by other cops because of guaranteed retribution
In my book, that makes those "other cops" bad policemen.
We need the anonymous blogs...
Or more Policemen that respect their badges and what they stand for?
If it's not true, then it's probably libel, then the blogger should be stopped.
I think you should be modded flamebait instead of interesting. While your post IS interesting, it isn't for the right reasons. You are flamebaiting liberals and you don't really make much sense. Let me explain...
The first problem with your post is that you haven't even seen the blog in question. I am assuming this is the case since you use words like "if" when you describe the grammar and spelling. So you are just guessing at this point which is kind of strange. Also, you are stereotyping that white people can spell and black people can't. I guess I don't really have that stereotype in my head, but let's assume that that is accurate and the stereotype exists for some statistically significant reasoning. I could counter that stereotype by saying that most of the cops I know don't really care about their spelling or grammar regardless of their race so I fail to see how that would be so telling to you.
What's even more interesting to me is that you then post a story that has less to do with race and more to do with poverty. Did the public housing have a majority black population? Probably. But the section8 people all had poverty in common, not race. A black doctor living in a neighborhood is probably not going to cause the crime rate to go up in that area.
So, from all this I think you are probably racist. That's a harsh word to throw out there but that is the only reason I would think that you would associate race with your quoted article and also jump to conclusion about the Slashdot article without even seeing the blog.
As far as the liberal jab goes...what you wrote didn't bother me at all. Liberals see poverty as a large problem and are actually trying to address it. The section8 projects sounds like it didn't solve the problem (I don't know this for sure since we don't know if the overall crime rate went down or if crime went from being more concentrated to being more distributed). The crime rate may have gone up in new areas, but maybe those kids had a chance at a better education and it actually improved things overall. At least people are attempting to solve the problem. Republicans just want to help the rich because this supposedly passes the wealth on down to everyone else since they crate jobs etc etc trickle down economics garbage. Unfortunately that just tends to concentrate wealth and cause more poverty. And as the wealth becomes more concentrated at the top, there is less money for the middle and lower class to purchase with, thus harming an American's buying power and his/her ability to shop thus harming the economy. This stuff can be argued back and forth, but that is another side of that argument. I think having some rational social programs is humane and beneficial to the economy. To try to help and fail is better than to not try at all (as long as we are trying to learn and improve). Republicans (neo-cons) are a complete failure since they don't even hold to their conservative mantra. They just borrow and spend which is worse than any liberal Dem would do. I wouldn't mind Republicans if they actually cut spending and reduced taxation as it would help my bottom line. But they don't do that and just put us in huge deficits. So I have to be for the Dems. The redistribution of wealth (as inefficient as it is) is better than throwing the money in to stupid wars and a rising deficit. Hopefully the Republicans can find their conservative roots again...it doesn't seem like the Libertarians will be able to be a factor in this election where it seems like the true conservatism still lives. (wow, that went way out there but at least it has plenty of topics to discuss!)
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com