Slashdot Mirror


First Ever Criminal Arrest For Domain Name Theft

Domain Name News writes "Until recently, there hasn't been a case of a domain theft where the thief was caught and arrested. However, on July 30th, Daniel Goncalves was arrested at his home in Union, New Jersey and charged in a landmark case, the first criminal arrest for domain name theft in the United States. 'Cases of domain name theft have not typically involved a criminal prosecution because of the complexities, financial restraints and sheer time and energy involved. If a domain name is stolen, the victim of the crime in most cases would need experience with the technical and legal intricacies associated with the domain name system. To move the case forward, they would also need a law enforcement professional who understands the case or is willing to take the time to learn. For example, the Angels told us that in their case they called their local law enforcement in Florida who sent a uniformed officer in a squad car to their home. The first thing you can imagine the officer asked was, "What's a domain?"'"

294 comments

  1. Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs by gbulmash · · Score: 5, Funny

    Back in 1995, I was working as a salesman at Circuit City and sold a VCR to Steve Cohen, the guy who stole sex.com. He was bragging to me about how he'd been offered a million bucks for it but wasn't going to sell. Then he ended up returning the VCR. What a tool.

    1. Re:Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well of course he returned the VCR. How could you steal sex.com and not know that you can get all the porn you want for free off the internet. Who needs a VCR.

    2. Re:Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs by dhermann · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow, what an amazing but totally unverifiable story!

    3. Re:Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs by gbulmash · · Score: 1

      I actually tweeted it during the blip that was the #lameclaimtofame meme on Twitter. Of course, my lame claims to fame are legion. I put all those tweets into a single blog post if anyone's interested. They're all lame, and all true.

    4. Re:Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs by syousef · · Score: 2, Funny

      Back in 1995, I was working as a salesman at Circuit City and sold a VCR to Steve Cohen, the guy who stole sex.com. He was bragging to me about how he'd been offered a million bucks for it but wasn't going to sell. Then he ended up returning the VCR. What a tool.

      Aren't you a little old to be believing in the porn fairy?

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    5. Re:Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Twitter is lame, by definition.

    6. Re:Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs by plnix0 · · Score: 1

      Oh, well if you twitted it then it must be true!

  2. Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 4, Funny

    The first thing you can imagine the officer asked was, "What's a domain?".'"

    Why can't they be smart and well-versed in all things, like IT Professionals?

    1. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't think it was intended to be calling police officers dumb. Rather, I think the whole idea is that of law enforcement having to deal with obscure technical things that are totally outside of their expertise. Which is why this story is so interesting. The line is starting to blur between cyberspace and meatspace.

    2. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by oodaloop · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because people who dedicate themselves to the service of others, the improvement of their community, and betterment of society are stupid fascist pigs, and should be treated as such. Right slashdot?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    3. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't think it was intended to be calling police officers dumb. Rather, I think the whole idea is that of law enforcement having to deal with obscure technical things that are totally outside of their expertise. Which is why this story is so interesting. The line is starting to blur between cyberspace and meatspace.

      So long as the cop never uses the term "meatspace" he'll be a better man than both of us.

    4. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because people who dedicate themselves to the service of others, the improvement of their community, and betterment of society are stupid communist pigs, and should be treated as such. Right slashdot?

      ftfy?

    5. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's one of the more ignorant posts I've read today. Seriously, sure some police officers are like that, and they deserve to be locked up, but the majority are not. I don't know where you got that idea.
      I guess you don't here about John Police Officer not hurting anyone today on the news.

    6. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The same fascist pigs that you won't hesitate to call if you hear someone breaking into your house at 2:00 in the morning?

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    7. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by oodaloop · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Not sure if you picked up on the sarcasm there Joe. And BTW, pot smoking is ILLEGAL. Police officers are just doing their job. If you have a problem with the law, VOTE or STFU. I'm not even going to go into the vagaries of arm-chair second guessing the decisions of every instance of taser-use and the feasibility of asking about heart conditions during hand-to-hand conflict. I don't see how using a taser makes them fascist pigs in any case, but hey.

      and enforce the fucked up laws we have in the United States is a stupid, fascist pig

      Like, you know, the abolition on murder, rape, theft, arson, etc.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    8. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just doing their job?

      Where have I heard that before?

    9. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by n30na · · Score: 1

      Obviously, we need cybercops !

    10. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      If someone is breaking into my home at 2am, they better hope they can run faster than buckshot. The call is for the cops or coroner to come clean up the mess.

    11. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 2, Informative

      Robert Peel would disagree:

      Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    12. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by horatiocain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If (haha) homosexuality was illegal and the duty of police was to arrest and imprison those 'mos, would they still just be doing their job? Or would they be signing up to do something wrong?

      If I get paid to spam people, am I just doing my job when I spam your email? What if I get paid to write anti-Semitic propaganda? Would you say a certain type of person takes those jobs?

      There is a moral imperative not to accept a job the duties of which are corrupt. That's pretty easy to understand.

    13. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Em+Emalb · · Score: 1

      Oh My God. I love that this was modded as "Insightful".

      How full of yourselves are you?

      Wow. I am pretty sure it was a snarky comment. I could be wrong, in which case, holy arrogant asses, batman.

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    14. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Moryath · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What's truly ironic is that the anti-taser nonsense exposes the real goals of the nutbag/hoplophobic groups.

      The American Criminal Liberties Union, National Association for the Ascendancy of Crappy People, New Black Panthers, et al spent an amazing amount of time in the late '90s/early '00s suing police departments across the country, demanding more "nonlethal" weaponry be used by police (because if you draw a gun, you had better be prepared to shoot to kill.)

      Thus we wound up with cops carrying pepper spray (useful only at a range of melee combat: bad thought) and then the Taser, which is normally nonlethal unless someone fits certain conditions; sadly, one of those conditions is "hopped up on drugs like cocaine."

      Once they'd gotten that concession, however, the anti-police groups weren't done. Now they want to harm the police even further. The goal is to make it impossible for the police to ever do their jobs. Thus, if they taser someone who's trying to start a fight, and that person happens to have a heart condition or turns out to be on drugs that cause the body to mimic one, and it sends them into cardiac arrest or arrhythmia, then the nutbag groups scream bloody murder about how the cops "should have known" and shouldn't have used the taser.

      It's all about the fact that they hate the cops. I agree that there are cops out there that are dicks, but the vast majority of cops are incredible people. They do a job that is almost always thankless. They deal with people every day who approach them with incredibly disrespectful attitudes or try to bait them (see: Henry Louis Gates Jr the Racist Professor), merely because they think they can get away with it or because they have authority issues. They deal with working 12-14 hour shifts, because first they have to work their beat time, and then they have to do the paperwork AFTER their patrol hours. They have to deal with the stress of wondering, every time they put on their uniform, "is today the day some drunk/stoned motherfucker pulls a gun and instead of me coming home, it's the police chief/sergeant coming to my door to tell my wife and kids that I'm dead or in the hospital." They walk into every situation wondering if some stupid motherfucker is going to do something stupid that ends in them getting stuck in lawsuit hell. They get paid an incredibly small paycheck for the enormous amount of work they do.

      Re-read what I just posted. Now the next time you see a police officer, whether it is because you got pulled over for speeding or just that they happen to be in a store at the same time you are, tell them THANK YOU for doing the job they do.

    15. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because then they would be, you know, IT professionals?

    16. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pmarini · · Score: 1

      except that sometime they arrest you instead of the one who broke-in... (like Obama's friend...)

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    17. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by invertedflyboy · · Score: 1

      I'm ashamed I just giggled a little bit.

    18. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by hummassa · · Score: 3, Funny

      Your post is intelligent, well-tought, well-written, and your argument is consistent and relevant to the discussion at hand. Obviously, you are facing being banned by /. :-D

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    19. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Because people who dedicate themselves to the service of others, the improvement of their community, and betterment of society are stupid fascist pigs, and should be treated as such.

      No, those are the good cops and deserve to be treated with as much respect as they treat the public with. However, not all cops are good ones. It would be pretty naive to think that there aren't at least a small percentage of stupid fascists who are also cops. It would also be naive to think ALL cops fit into this category. Right common sense?

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    20. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by bennomatic · · Score: 1, Troll

      That is, as long as you keep that shotgun out of the hands of the perp. Lots of people end up at the wrong end of their own weapons when they try to defend their homes at 2am.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    21. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because people who dedicate themselves to the service of others, the improvement of their community, and betterment of society are stupid fascist pigs, and should be treated as such. Right slashdot?

      No, they're stupid socialist pigs. And for that, they deserve the sort of compassion you would reserve for the retarded.

    22. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now the next time you see a police officer, whether it is because you got pulled over for speeding or just that they happen to be in a store at the same time you are, tell them THANK YOU for doing the job they do.

      Should I thank the homophobe pig for busting queers in the park while letting the straight people go (because straight people having sex in the park is romantic)?

      Should I thank him for arresting people that buy too much cold medicine because we make the assumption that they'll make meth with it?

      Should I thank him for arresting people and impounding their car over a joint in the ashtray?

      And of course, the idea that a taser is only lethal to someone "hopped up on drugs" is absurd, and the evidence doesn't support it.

      National Association for the Ascendancy of Crappy People, New Black Panthers

      I think we all see you're agenda here. Quite a departure from your usual "kill all niggers" post, eh?

      No, cops are NOT good people. Cops are immoral scumbags, and they shouldn't be thanked.

    23. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as cyberspace.
      This sounds more like a civil matter than a criminal one, or at least a case of fraud. The fact that a local constable was called when maybe a DA would be more appropriate blurs nothing.

    24. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As perplexing as it is for me to disagree with someone who links to Jeff Cooper, even if it is Wikipedia, the idea that cops need to be better armed for safety reasons is far overblown.

      In the US being a cop is safer than being a fisherman. And the relatively few cops who are hurt or killed on the job get it from traffic accidents, not suspects shooting them or beating them or the like. So if you really want to help keep cops safe you should argue to abolish high speed chases. But since traffic accidents don't play well on TV but 2 guys robbing a bank in body armor does, the change cops get is an AR they'll never used in the trunk of their cruiser while they choke slam the guy who on the verge of a diabetic coma because they haven't been trained well enough to recognize he isn't drunk.

      They'll shoot that AR once a year, when they qual, and that is it.

      I'm usually someone's guest at the SHOT show. In the five years I've been going the cop supply people have slowly merged to become indistinguishable from the military supply people, pitching SWAT level gear as indispensible for every beat cop out there. This is almost all pointless chest thumping. Most of that gear will never be used.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    25. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Dishevel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Lots? Define lots. Is lots more than or less than the number of people who pull out a weapon and make the thieves run off? Is lots more than or less than the number of lives saved by guns in home. Is lots just a number that people who hate guns pull out of their asses?

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    26. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      Some cops are immoral scumbags. Just some. Probably very few. Of course a great majority of the rest of the cops out there will protect with false reports and outright lies those scumbags.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    27. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Sl4shd0t0rg · · Score: 0

      No, the sarcasm seems obvious.

    28. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Tdawgless · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You should see how many people die in their homes without a weapon at 2am.

    29. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by forand · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are aware that police are able to do their jobs in many countries without access to firearms on a daily basis at all. And it is very inaccurate if not deceptive to say that requiring police officers to use non-lethal force would "harm the police." While I do not think police should be forced to go unprotected on raids and what not, they need to be better trained on how and when to use both lethal and non-lethal force. In a recent case in Ohio a police officer used his taser in groin area of a minor while the minor was already subdued. Such actions make it difficult for many of us to trust police with ANY weapons. The fact that many of the actions taken by such "dicks" are left unpunished by their fellow officers, or the law in general, makes it very difficult for the public to trust any of them and, I believe, much more difficult for them to do their jobs.

      Basically I think we should pay our police better and demand they follow the letter of the law they are hired to enforce. But arguing that their job is hard so we should let them act illegally just unacceptable.

    30. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem ends up in extreme cases, like the one in BC, Canada with the Polish guy that couldn't speak English. He was tazed *8 times* until he has a seizure and died.

      There are a lot of cops that are using things like tazers at times when they wouldn't use a gun. Got a perp that is cooperating, but yelling at you? I've got the solution! Threaten to taze him if he doesn't shut up! Can you tell me that at anytime in history a cop would have pulled a gun on someone that was yelling and arguing with them, but *NOT* being threatening towards the cop in a physical sense? Is that what used to happen before the Black Panthers 'defanged' the police department?

      The problem is that the police have no respect to tazers that they do for guns. They will not hesitate to use a tazer in a situation where they would hesitate to use a gun. This might be fine if the tazer had no risks associated with it, but it does. And police departments and corporations selling the devices want to play down the risks... this only encourages police officers that there is no risk in using a tazer on someone just because they are being loud and won't shut up when asked. Give me a break!

    31. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Maximus633 · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      I couldn't agree more with your post. General society will tell the soldiers, fire fighters, and EMS thank you for doing their jobs but most forget police officers.

      Being the son of both parents being police officers (my Dad is retired) I can point out that everything you said here is extremely true. I can remember the first time my Mom called me while I was at school just to tell me she loved me so much. She called because she was involved in a shooting. I can tell you I am more afraid of my Dad and I getting a visit from the Police Chief, Captain of Patrol, and the shift Sergent at our house to tell us tat something happened to my Mom in the line of duty. Every day she (and when my Dad wore his) puts that uniform on you draw a big target on yourself.

      Not only that but the pay is not only crappy but low for what they do. My Mom has to work extra jobs on her time off in order to make enough money to help pay bills. She makes less then 56,000/yr and has been in law enforcement for 17 years. I have been in the work force less then 5 and have no degree and make 45,000/yr. Something majorly wrong with those pictures.

      So to all the officers on Slashdot Thanks!

    32. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Nicely written ... by a WASP who has never been "questioned" (i.e. harassed) by the police simply for being brown/black/wrong-place-at-wrong-time/etc.

    33. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pnewhook · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If someone is breaking into my home at 2am, they better hope they can run faster than buckshot. The call is for the cops or coroner to come clean up the mess.

      And then the cop will arrest you for manslaughter. You do realize that self defense requires the application of only that amount of force necessary?

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    34. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      The goal is to make it impossible for the police to ever do their jobs... It's all about the fact that they hate the cops.

      Citations needed. I'm a member of the ACLU, I didn't get the memo that we hate cops. I was under the impression that we appreciated law enforcement and laws, but that both need careful pruning to keep them from getting overgrown. But hey, you sound like you know better than I do, it probably ISN'T that you and I disagree over the best way to do so, it's that we hate them all. So much simpler than trying to figure out what's reasonable for law enforcement to do and what is overly intrusive.

    35. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      use a taser on people without knowing if they have a heart condition

      Because shooting them is so much better than tazing them??

      Or how about requiring the officer to say 'excuse me sir, would you mind singing this form stating you do not have a heart condition, understand the risks of electric shock, and agree to hold the police force not responsible for any possible injury before i tazer you? Thank you for your cooperation.'.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    36. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by g1zmo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And you clearly don't realize that the laws of a particular jurisdiction may very well be different from the applicable laws where you live.

      --
      I have found there are just two ways to go.
      It all comes down to livin' fast or dyin' slow.
      -REK, Jr.
    37. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Police mortality rates are not even among the top ten for most dangerous jobs in America. Loggers, Pilots, Fishermen, Steel Workers, Garbage Men, Farmers, Roofers, Electricians, Truck Drivers, and Taxi Drivers all have a higher death rate by at least THREE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE.

      Next time you see your local Garbage Collector, be sure to tell them THANK YOU for doing the job they do.

    38. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      And you clearly don't realize that the laws of a particular jurisdiction may very well be different from the applicable laws where you live.

      Well yes, if he lives in the jungles of Bolivia I guess he could get away with shooting a trespasser.

      Here's an interesting discussion on self defense justification if you are interested: http://law.jrank.org/pages/1470/Justification-Self-Defense-Necessary-force.html

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    39. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Aldenissin · · Score: 1

      They'll shoot that AR once a year, when they qual, and that is it. I'm usually someone's guest at the SHOT show. In the five years I've been going the cop supply people have slowly merged to become indistinguishable from the military supply people, pitching SWAT level gear as indispensible for every beat cop out there. This is almost all pointless chest thumping. Most of that gear will never be used. /end quote Sure I would tend to agree with you, at first. But some do shoot it more than once. Probably even more then you think, if they own it. Especially in the south where I am. But regardless, if the scenario may arise where the equipment IS needed, then it is worth every penny. Should the scenario ever arise, then I would want those officers to feel as familiar with being the person responsible enough to bear those arms as they can (unlike this guy ). that if that time does come they need to act they are able to do so to the best of their ability. Next question, does chest thumping help? Well, my theory again is that in life one must be familiar with things. If getting hype allows your body to aim true when needed, then so be it. Sitting it on your mid cage or your trunk as a job required moving paperweight yea, but personally if it was my rifle, it would be my gun.

      --
      Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
    40. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That makes THEM immoral scumbags too.

    41. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Artifex · · Score: 3, Informative

      If someone is breaking into my home at 2am, they better hope they can run faster than buckshot. The call is for the cops or coroner to come clean up the mess.

      And then the cop will arrest you for manslaughter. You do realize that self defense requires the application of only that amount of force necessary?

      I live in Texas. If I fear for my life or am afraid for my property, pretty much I can use whatever force is necessary to make the bad man go away.

      (Yes, some terrible abuses of castle laws have happened. Doesn't mean they don't exist)

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
    42. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Because shooting them is so much better than tazing them??

      You're assuming that, when faced with a difficult situation, a police officer's two options are to 1) shoot the person or 2) taze the person. Many police officers are increasingly taking the view that tazing is justified when the person is disagreeing or arguing with the officer. Neither shooting nor tazing is justified at that point, police need to realize that dialogue is still an option.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    43. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rather sad, isn't it? Alas, short of managing to escape (obviously the option of choice), lethal force is the only way of knowing 100% that one is safe in such a situation. If someone is in my home at night, I'm not willing to make assumptions at that point, and I certaintly wouldn't be willing to risk even that 1% chance that I end up dead by the end of the night.
      Better to be judged by twelve than carried by eight.

    44. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by neiko · · Score: 1

      Live in Colorado myself...ever heard of the "Make My Day" law?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine_in_the_United_States

    45. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      If the criminal knows, or suspects that your armed they know to shoot you inorder to guaruntee their own safety.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    46. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by cffrost · · Score: 1

      Agreed.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    47. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      Basically I think we should pay our police better and demand they follow the letter of the law they are hired to enforce.

      The problem with this is that when you call the police on them, they are always the closest unit to respond. And I don't see how better pay helps--you'd need to be a saint not to abuse police power. A good start to increasing accountability would be to eliminate union-granted tenure (good luck fighting the unions), but even then most of the public and all of the government won't encourage "hard police work" because it takes longer and reduces the clearance rate.

    48. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Nah, this is little more then identity theft and espionage.

      Some grunt officer will have to take a report and do some preliminary investigation before it goes to a DA's office.

    49. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Sadly, one not being the other doesn't limit the other from being one.

      It may not be a requirement to be a fascist pig to be a police officer but often fascist pigs become police officers and they are the ones getting the media attention forming out opinions.

    50. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most criminals are scared of being shot so they will move on to something else or attempt the break in when you are not home.

      About the only way they will shoot you first knowing you have a gun is if you are specifically targeted before hand. In that case, I'm not sure how many people will be in a different situation with or without a gun.

      Seriously, think about it. How many cops who wear their guns on their side in plain view are mugged each year? It isn't the hat the protects them more then anyone else. The badge doesn't do much either because the same rules for killing them can apply there too.

    51. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the criminal knows, or suspects that your armed they know to shoot you inorder to guaruntee their own safety.

      Typical anti-gun nuts. You have absolutely no statistics to support your claim.

    52. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      Why can't they be smart and well-versed in all things, like IT Professionals?

      Because they don't always have a good range of free reading materials at Dunkin' Donuts?

    53. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by roc97007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, no. They know to try next door where there's a chance that the owner is not armed.

      To test, put this sign on your lawn: "No guns in the house" Get back to us.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    54. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Urban legend.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    55. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by similar_name · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well yes, if he lives in the jungles of Bolivia I guess he could get away with shooting a trespasser.

      Or he could live in Texas. See Make My Day Law or Castle Doctrine. Of note is it gives you the right to defend your property against intrusion which may lead to violent attack.

      I've often wondered does this mean that if someone sneaks into your back yard at 2 in the morning and drown in your pool, are you responsible? But if you shoot them as they come onto your property then are you within your rights?

    56. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Seraphim1982 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the criminal knows, or suspects that your armed they know to shoot you inorder to guaruntee their own safety.

      If the criminal knows, or suspects that you're armed they know they'd be better off going after a different target.

    57. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      On a fundamental level, I don't believe that calling the police will help me and mine during a 2:00 AM break-in. It just takes too long for the police to respond. I think that if people are sleeping better at night knowing they can call 911 in the event of an armed break-in, they're probably being naive, but hey, whatever makes you feel better.

      I'd probably call the police for completeness, if I have time. I have battery backed-up infrared cameras (surprisingly inexpensive to purchase and install if you do it yourself), dogs, and firearms as a first, second, and third levels of defense. I suspect that levels 1 and 2 will be enough to deter most intruders, and I practice regularly to insure that level 3 will be effective in the gravest extreme.

      I sleep lightly, and come fully awake quickly. I wonder if this has anything to do with decades of after-hours on-call. I'm sure most of the geeks here have had this experience -- has carrying the pager improved the speed and alertness with which you come awake? Even if you do not choose to arm yourself, it might give you the edge you need to leave the premises quickly (which is realistically your only other option).

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    58. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is exactly why you load rock salt into shotgun shells. Non lethal, and perfect for home defense.

    59. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You are aware that police are able to do their jobs in many countries without access to firearm"
      What country is that???? England?

      "In a recent case in Ohio a police officer used his taser in groin area of a minor while the minor was already subdued."

      Out of how many arrests in the past 20 years? Assuming that the act was completely done with malicious intent. Come on, you take one incident and generalize an entire profession. There are assholes in this world so people will behave badly at some point. So you have a problem with authority, an dehumanize the individuals enforcing it.

      By the way their job is hard. Think about a profession where people is always lying to you or the person you are about to approach could kill you if you are not in your toes.

    60. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Actually in those terms, firearms are more frequently used for suicide than for self defense. The kind of scenario that you're suggesting is vastly out numbered by suicides. Admittedly it does leave out other legal uses like hunting and target practice, but it is pretty clear that firearms for self defense is counterproductive at best.

      Suicides Half Of Gun Deaths In US

    61. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Actually, in order for it to be self defense you have to be repelling the intruder typically. Yes I know there are backwards parts of the country that allow that kind of reckless and irresponsible behavior, but typically speaking once they've been repelled you no longer have the legal right to claim self defense.

      On top of that, I wouldn't necessarily recommend assuming that those laws allowing it are going to withstand judicial scrutiny or that the jury will agree that it was actually self defense.

    62. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that, when faced with a difficult situation, a police officer's two options are to 1) shoot the person or 2) taze the person.

      No, I'm assuming when those are the only two options, using a tazer is the better of the two by far.

      A tazer is just another tool like his gun, baton, pepper spray, or just talking. You're assuming officers are untrained regarding when to use a tazer and when not to.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    63. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but I've done some reading on this.

      Individual rules depend on the state -- I've heard that in some areas (not where I'd want to live) you are required to attempt to vacate your home if someone breaks in. But in most places in the US, if a reasonable person would believe their life is threatened, lethal force is justified in self-defense. In most US courts, any firearm discharge is considered "lethal force", and deliberately "shooting to wound" is a pretty good sign that you did not believe your life was being threatened. Best practice, both legally and effectively, is to shoot only if you are in fear for your life, and to aim for the center of mass.

      So, it is very specifically not "only the amount of force necessary". It's basically an on-off situation. In fear of your life, shoot. Not in fear of your life, do not shoot. An (presumably armed) intruder at 2:00 AM would put most reasonable people in fear of their lives. You are not required to wrestle with him, or cross knives or baseball bats. It's not a dual amongst equals, or a bar fight, or a boxing match. You are not required to try to arrest him. You may be required to flee -- check the laws in your area.

      Police have more complicated rules of engagement, but they have had different training, and society has different expectations of them.

      What transpires when the police show up and later in court are not nearly as important as those 60 - 90 seconds during the break-in. You have to survive that first, or what happens afterward is moot.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    64. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by hedwards · · Score: 1

      You're not understanding. The reason why police officers are issued side arms is because we have the 2nd amendment. If we were living in a nation where there was strict gun control and a reasonable expectation that coming in contact with armed individuals was rare, then disarming them might be a reasonable solution.

      The problem is that we do have a lot of very dangerous people out there with firearms that are at times vastly superior to the ones that the police carry. On top of that you don't necessarily know when the weapon is going to save a life in there hands.

      On top of that, the point of the gear is that it's probably not ever going to be used. While it is unusual, there are some beat cops out there that have never in an entire career unholstered their side arm on duty. Sure it doesn't happen that often, but I can guarantee you that should they need it and not have it there would be hell to pay later on.

      As far as high speed chases go, you do realize that most if not all police departments frown on high speed chases for that very reason, that's not to say that they don't happen, but they are pretty rare and in most cases the officer will break off the chase pretty quickly. Instead deferring to helicopters and other cars to spike to disable the car.

    65. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Based on the way they actually use their tazer, yes I'm inclined to think that they are too quick to rely on it.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    66. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      The same fascist pigs that you won't hesitate to call if you hear someone breaking into your house at 2:00 in the morning?

      Where I live, if I call the police about hearing someone breaking into the house at 2am its likely that I might actually see a police officer in a few weeks time.

      'The Filth' is the most apt term I know.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    67. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by leetwanker · · Score: 2, Funny

      Plus is repels demons and ghosts, evil spirits of all sorts! Double good! ;)

    68. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by ajlisows · · Score: 1

      And then the cop will arrest you for manslaughter. You do realize that self defense requires the application of only that amount of force necessary?

      That is a very dangerous caveat to the self defense law. If an intruder comes into your home looking like he is there to steal by any means necessary it is unlikely that you will have time to analyze his overall health and state of mind do determine how much force is necessary. In most cases, being awake and alert and standing in the same room as the person will be enough to make them want to leave. Other times, all of those things plus holding a gun will do it. Sometimes, clipping the person on the arm with a .22 caliber pistol will be enough. In the most extreme cases, you'd have to unload a clip of .22 ammo do stop them.

      If the criminal is indeed a threat to your life or health, the last thing you need is to hesitate pulling the trigger trying to decide how much force is needed. That could very likely lead to the gun being turned around and pointed at you and yours. Of course, telling people to fire away as soon as they see an intruder could lead to things like the really drunk guy who actually thinks he is in his home taking a slug to the chest or something like that.

      The "Necessary Force" idea may work if we could assume that we are always dealing with reasonable people (in terms of both the property owner, the authorities, and the judge/jury presiding over a case.) Of course, people are not always reasonable, as evidenced by the need for such laws in the first place. ;)

    69. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Jimbob+The+Mighty · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine called the police to inform them that there was a trespasser in her shed, looking for stuff to steal. The cops said they would be there in 20 minutes. She then told them not to worry, she had a kitchen knife and would take care of the problem herself. the police arrived 2 minutes later. And people wonder why some other people like to hate on cops?

    70. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by ajlisows · · Score: 1

      If you increase the pay of the police drastically, I think it could have a pretty bad effect on law enforcement. Right now I think that some people go into that line of work because they want the power to dole out justice. Add a large sum of money to that equation and you are offering power AND money. Needless to say that combination may not be the best way to attract the most moral police force.

    71. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      Based on the way they actually use their tazer, yes I'm inclined to think that they are too quick to rely on it.

      Do their job for a while, then if you have the same opinion it might be worth something.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    72. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 3, Funny
      Guy 1:

      National Association for the Ascendancy of Crappy People

      Guy 2:

      No, cops are NOT good people. Cops are immoral scumbags, and they shouldn't be thanked.

      WTF? In a rare departure from form, both sides of the discussion are morons. I don't know who to root for!

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    73. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Must be a very specialized criminal to only target double amputees

    74. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by TheLink · · Score: 1

      But that's because it's not standard procedure for garbagemen to tase uncooperative garbage cans from a safe distance.

      The cops are doing what they think is the safe thing (for them anyway). :)

      --
    75. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Minwee · · Score: 1

      If someone is breaking into my home at 2am, they better hope they can run faster than buckshot.

      And this is why we are never going to try and throw you another surprise birthday party.

    76. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Minwee · · Score: 1
      Guy 2:

      I think we all see you're agenda here

      Guy number 2 also misused an apostrophe. I think that answers your question.

    77. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      My whole problem with the 'I have a gun to protect me and my family' is if some guy barges into your house with the intent of killing you, do you really have the gun loaded and next to you (if so then you are either paranoid or don't know how to store a gun safely or both).

      Not only that but the chances of you needing a gun to protect yourself is extremely slim, even if you ignore the even lower odds of having the opportunity to use one. Odds are far higher that you will die of a heart attack, but how many people have automatic defibrulators in their home?

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    78. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Pantero+Blanco · · Score: 1

      I don't see how the number of deliberate suicides via firearms "counters" the use of them for self-defense. In fact, I don't see what relevance it has at all, except to "emotionalize" the debate while making no point at all.

      It's quick, it minimalizes the risk to others, there's a low rate of failure, no one has to go looking for the body, and the whole thing is in the hands of the person who wants to do it (ie, some subway or semi driver isn't being used as the tool). If someone's going to kill himself, I'd rather he use a gun than throw himself off a building or in front of a train.

    79. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by leetwanker · · Score: 1
      Your post is moronic. The first part of the post you show your prejudices and then go on to ask that we keep an open mind about what police officers go through.

      Think what you want about the ACLU and the NAACP, but the fact is, they're trying to fight for people's rights that so often get trampled. It's good that they fought for less lethal equipment for law enforcement. Now I'm sure the police are wondering what they ever did without them.

      Problem is, now the police are abusing them. They didn't give those weapons to police so they could go around tasing anybody that wasn't complying with their orders, do you agree?

      Any sort of weapon should only be used as the last resort. The old lady who was being unruly on the side of the road could have easily been restrained and handcuffed, but instead, she was tased. Another incident that got me mad as hell was an incident in Southern Illinois at a state home for orphaned children. The cops went in and tased three minors, threatened one with sodomy, held a 17 year-old girl up against a wall by her neck while the cop asked if she wanted to live or die. Now I concede that as there's no video of this incident there's no way of knowing if that's the truth or not, but as the police department only responded with, "the officers acted appropriately", that's the only side I have to go by. Another problem with the case is, it wasn't until a year later that the news went national and then only because a civil lawsuit was filed. And then, only because as it was a state home, the administrators were obligated to do so on behalf of the boys and girl who were assaulted.

      Your attempted insinuation that only those "hopped up on cocaine" are susceptible to fatal consequences from tasers is laughable. A countless number of situations, circumstances, and medical conditions could put someone at risk of fatal injury from high voltage electric shock. All police officers have to keep this in mind when they are considering employing such means to subdue a suspect.

      Please, please don't get me wrong. If a suspect is attempting to attack and officer or someone else, I have absolutely no problem with tasers being used! In fact, in some cases, with the kind of evil criminals that are out on their streets, I wish sometimes that there was no less lethal solution to be utilized and we could avoid the trouble of a trial with a trip to the morgue. (I'm not condoning murder, just a shortcut to justice.)

      On to the second part of your post, the part where you actually show that you're intelligent and capable of compassion, or at least would like others to have compassion for you, if you are as I suspect, a police officer.

      I am very appreciative of those good police who approach their jobs with humility and respect for others. I understand the risks they incur to protect the rest of us. I'm not sure that the 'vast majority', as you say, approach their jobs in this manner. I wish they did. I think that the police who treat people with respect, until they lose that right, will most times receive the same in return. If you are a police officer as I suspect, do you really have a problem finding people who appreciate what you do? I really can't imagine that being true. Unless you're out there throwing the book at everyone while being disrespectful. Why don't you try and think about how you'd act if someone acted toward you the same way you act toward them?

      What scares me is when I watch the TV Show, Cops, I see injustices of all sorts, not necessarily of the illegal variety, possibly just unfair. If the officers feel comfortable doing things like that on the small screen, I have to assume what goes on off camera is that much worse. Also I assume they put only their best officers on the show, what are the bad ones doing?

      For instance, using tinted windows as probable cause to stop and search a car. Or a tail light with translucent tape over an area that got broken out for probable cause to stop and search a car. Both stops lead to arrests and I can

    80. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by ajlisows · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the people that keep guns loaded up in the house are obviously a bit paranoid and put their families in more danger than the possibility of an intruder. No doubt. However, people can do it right I think....especially in a two story house.

      Random Scenario....If you hear someone busting windows/rummaging around downstairs that should give you adequate time to unlock your gun cabinet and load the weapon AND get your family as far away from the staircase as possible while your wife/friend/whomever dials 911 and you go stand near the top of the stairs ready to make a stand in case the criminals actually intend to harm your family.

      There is the possibility of an UNLOADED gun being effective enough to deter also. When I was in college I was significantly more naive and left my doors unlocked. I was taking a nap one Sunday afternoon and my girlfriend shook me awake saying someone was in the apartment. I didn't really believe her but I grabbed the hunting knife I kept on my headboard and went to look. Sure enough, there was a very large man obviously strung out on drugs standing in the doorway of my apartment. He looked at me, looked at the knife, and backed out slowly. If he would have attacked me, I'm not sure I could have handled him but the possibility of getting stabbed seemed to trump the possibility of grabbing my stack of CD's (Stealing CD's was real common back in those days. The used music stores would buy them for at least a dollar each)

      I myself have rifles and shotguns in my apartment. I have no kids so I just have trigger locks on them, no cabinet, and the ammo is almost always locked up in the basement. My guns are for hunting and trap shooting (And of course, rising up against the establishment when the revolution comes...or whatever). I don't even consider them as intruder protection as the layout of my apartment dictates that if someone burst through the door when I was sleeping they'd be on me waaaaay before the guns came into play. I count on a deadbolt, a lock, and a sliding chain to keep them occupied long enough to get out the back door.

    81. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by leetwanker · · Score: 1
      I'm sure they're trained. But can you show me any laws or regulations saying when you can and when you can't tase someone? I bet not...

      Also, we're not talking about when a cop's only options are to tase or shoot. We're talking about when many more options are available and the taser is what is used. You have to be living under a rock to not realize that this happens every...single...day!

      Let's get real, okay?

    82. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > My whole problem with the 'I have a gun to protect me and my family' is if some guy barges into your house with the intent of killing you, do you really have the gun loaded and next to you

      Yes, I really do.

      > (if so then you are either paranoid or don't know how to store a gun safely or both).

      You really don't have any idea. Look, for your own sake, please do some research so you don't embarrass yourself next time. You don't help your argument by indulging in this kind of hyperbole.

      I do have a firearm and a flashlight right by my bed. They're in a gun safe that's bolted to the floor on my side of the bed. The case has combination buttons on the top, spaced out and designed for easy access in the dark. Yes, I do practice opening the safe in the dark. I can go from prone on the bed to fully armed with a flashlight in my off hand in less than three seconds. One one thousand two one thousand three one armed. Just like that.

      These types of safes are readily available, relatively inexpensive, secure, and open very quickly if you know the combination. If not, you can punch buttons all day and not get anywhere. The fact that you don't know this tells me you've never been in a gun store or attended a gun show, and you probably don't know anyone who owns a firearm for self defense.

      Parenthetically, the flashlight is in the safe so that I know it's going to be there. I used to keep a flashlight sitting on the night stand, but wife or daughter would borrow it and forget to put it back. Yes, I do test it and change out the batteries periodically, and also cycle the ammunition. It's no more onerous than rotating the tires on your car.

      It's not a matter of paranoia. If you're going to arm yourself, you owe it to yourself and your family to do it right. If you're not going to arm yourself, then by all means, dial 911 and hope. Or flee. Fleeing is a good option. If you have children, fleeing becomes more complicated.

      The defibrillator is a bad example -- it so happens there's one not six feet from my desk, in the first responder pack. But granted, most people don't have one handy. In any case, I'm pretty sure you can't prove the odds are higher that I will have a heart attack, without knowing my lifestyle. I can tell you that I've had four intruders in the last 25 years, three driven off by dogs before I decided to own a gun, and the fourth scampered as soon as the flash hit him. Not one heart attack yet. So I guess I'm beating the odds.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    83. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      Aww I love the term meatspace, it makes all the vegans nervous.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    84. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      Even the dumbest criminal knows that its better to break into an old ladys house with a stupid yapping dog when you can't hear the yapping dog since she's not home. She put it in her purse while she walks around the mall for her morning exercise. Rather than break into the guy next doors place who just had UPS drop off 20,000 rounds of ammo and has animal heads mounted on his wall visible from the street and a car parked out front with a sticker of "shoot first, don't bother asking" proudly in the center of his bumper.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    85. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      Wait, your arguing against guns because people use it for *suicide*?! A person has the right to terminate their life for any reason they so desire. If they want to off themselves it shouldn't be illegal for them to seek assistance so that its painless. Because assisted suicide is illegal people take it into their own hands and as the other responder says sometimes include innocent people in their attempts, potentially killing them along with themselves, or worse kill the other person and survive themselves. Oh and incase you think my opinion is only theory I've had family kill themselves and people I love attempt it. It's a selfish thing but that does not remove ones right to end ones own life in whatever way you see fit. The fact that they today live fairly happy lives almost directly related to their failed suicide attempts doesn't change that. As for those that succeeded, well if there is anything after this life I'll be first in line to kick the shit out of them.

      Suicide in no way should be used as an argument against gun ownership, that is a personal choice, that is like saying we should outlaw cars or plastic bags or rope because they can be used by someone to kill themselves, its idiotic and treats people like their children. You have the right not to own a gun and I respect that, I myself don't own a gun either, but I absolutely and emphatically support peoples *right* to owning them.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    86. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      Simple solution, pull them out of the pool and shoot them ;-)

      But seriously, thats bullshit, someone trespassing onto your property and your responsible for their safety?! I know this is a real law, or at least a pervasive urban legend, but thats just an insanely stupid law.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    87. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      And get sued by the person assaulting you. Once they make laws where people who are breaking and entering can't sue the person who non-lethally stopped them I'll advocate your position. Until then I vote for buckshot for those who choose to arm themselves.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    88. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      So a police officers job by definition is corrupt? To Server and Protect is immoral? Ok, while I wish the government would be abolished and we could all live in a mad max utopian world where you can only rely on yourself, calling a police officers job corrupt and immoral *at its base* is just fucking stupid. Yeah traffic cops suck, yeah cops can be assholes (as you and I are proving right now, all humans have this capacity) and I do believe cops should receive harsher sentences than the general population when they go out of line. But beyond that I have a great deal of respect for someone who runs *towards* the sound of gunfire instead of away from it. Just because you get a ticket for something stupid and you feel is unfair doesn't change the fact that the person issuing that ticket may be shot dead tomorrow, something most of us don't have as *regular and frequent possibility* in their jobs.

      Now please pull your head out of your ass and don't judge an entire profession by the few assholes that make headlines or the ones who reciprocated your sparkling personality.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    89. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So a police officers job by definition is corrupt?

      Yes, insofar as they are expected to imprison potsmokers, Jews, and Communists.

      I'm not saying every cop is an asshole, I'm saying, if they weren't assholes, they'd have signed up to be firefighters.

    90. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So a police officers job by definition is corrupt?

      Yes, insofar as they are expected to imprison potsmokers, Jews, and Communists.

      I'm not saying every cop is an asshole, I'm saying, if they weren't assholes, they'd have signed up to be firefighters.

      Furthermore, weren't the gestapo assholes? Gosh, Iranian police are assholes but even they're not as bad as the SS.

      Americans, they're even less assholey than the Iranian police. And in Frisco, they come even closer to being decent human beings.

      Etc.

      Now, nobody is saying they're *all* assholes. The uniform is the asshole, and the uniforms are myriad, and the uniforms are against you, so look out.

    91. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      In the UK cops don't carry guns.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    92. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by alex67500 · · Score: 1

      No, they're stupid socialist pigs. And for that, they deserve the sort of compassion you would reserve for the retarded.

      Are you implying that socialist = retard? \o/ in my arms \o/

    93. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now the next time you see a police officer, whether it is because you got pulled over for speeding or just that they happen to be in a store at the same time you are, tell them THANK YOU for doing the job they do.

      Should I thank the homophobe pig for busting queers in the park while letting the straight people go (because straight people having sex in the park is romantic)?

      Should I thank him for arresting people that buy too much cold medicine because we make the assumption that they'll make meth with it?

      Should I thank him for arresting people and impounding their car over a joint in the ashtray?

      And of course, the idea that a taser is only lethal to someone "hopped up on drugs" is absurd, and the evidence doesn't support it.

      National Association for the Ascendancy of Crappy People, New Black Panthers

      I think we all see you're agenda here. Quite a departure from your usual "kill all niggers" post, eh?

      No, cops are NOT good people. Cops are immoral scumbags, and they shouldn't be thanked.

      Sir, are you a libtard by any chance? Ever heard of murderers, serial killers, rapists, child killers, pedophiles?

      No, thank god for cops. They are basically the good guys protecting the rest of us from the scum of society.

    94. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      But can you show me any laws or regulations saying when you can and when you can't tase someone? I bet not

      Sure.. just type 'taser guidelines' into google. Here are just the first few...

      http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/07/24/bc-rcmp-braidwood-guidelines.html

      http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2009/08/01/10332011-sun.html

      http://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0068.htm

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    95. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this time seems that the domain was actually stolen and not "cybersquatted". I wonder however how cybersquatting differ, for example, from trading in shares and why is that a crime (when there are no trademarks involved)

    96. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh fuck off! I am sick and tired of that same old excuse. There is no police draft. No one is conscripted into the police force. Policemen/women sign up for the job and do it. If they didn't want to do it they shouldn't have signed up. Sure we NEED police but they should know what they are getting themselves into. Do you think that if someone is mouthing off, they should be pepper sprayed of beaten with a club? So why is a taser any better? Sure everyone from time to time would probably want to see tons of these smug thugs with a bullet in their head but that is not how things work. Following procedure and protecting the rights of citizens douche or not is bigger than a situation that might arise. So please with that "well if you did this job..." crap. There are tons of jobs that pay just as low and don't require the risk involved, but they most often know what they are getting themselves into.

    97. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now the next time you see a police officer, whether it is because you got pulled over for speeding or just that they happen to be in a store at the same time you are, tell them THANK YOU for doing the job they do.

      Should I thank the homophobe pig for busting queers in the park while letting the straight people go (because straight people having sex in the park is romantic)?

      Should I thank him for arresting people that buy too much cold medicine because we make the assumption that they'll make meth with it?

      Should I thank him for arresting people and impounding their car over a joint in the ashtray?

      And of course, the idea that a taser is only lethal to someone "hopped up on drugs" is absurd, and the evidence doesn't support it.

      National Association for the Ascendancy of Crappy People, New Black Panthers

      I think we all see you're agenda here. Quite a departure from your usual "kill all niggers" post, eh?

      No, cops are NOT good people. Cops are immoral scumbags, and they shouldn't be thanked.

      You're an utter moron, and the dolts who modded you up are totally brain-dead.

      All you offer are stupid straw men.

      Ever actually bother to see what the limit for pseudoephedrine actually is? I have. You can keep a family of 15 awake for an entire month on what you're allowed to buy in that month. Trying to buy more than the limit is fishy at best.

      As I said, you're a MORON.

    98. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      That would be because they Keep losing them.

      Seriously, they do have guns, they bring them along quite often for miner things like when they think they will encounter a bunch of people "dancing all night long".

      But yes, they don't always wear guns. That's probably because most of the UK citizens are refused the right to use a weapon in their own defense and guns are pretty much locked away from the unprivileged classes of people in the UK. So in a conversation about being shot or shooting them first, is bringing up UK police really relevant? I don't really think so. You also have the CC cameras on every street corner and cops in the UK travel in packs with several not more then a few moments away.

    99. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Moryath · · Score: 1

      No, your post is moronic.

      Think what you want about the ACLU and the NAACP, but the fact is, they're trying to fight for people's rights that so often get trampled.

      Bullshit. They stopped fighting for the rights of anyone but criminals 20 years ago. They have actually been involved in suing homeowners for injuries suffered BY BURGLARS.

      The old lady who was being unruly on the side of the road could have easily been restrained and handcuffed, but instead, she was tased. Another incident that got me mad as hell was an incident in Southern Illinois at a state home for orphaned children. The cops went in and tased three minors, threatened one with sodomy, held a 17 year-old girl up against a wall by her neck while the cop asked if she wanted to live or die. Now I concede that as there's no video of this incident there's no way of knowing if that's the truth or not, but as the police department only responded with, "the officers acted appropriately", that's the only side I have to go by.

      Yawn. In the first place, the "old lady" bit? I've seen the video. She was tased to prevent her from running into traffic and getting her ass run over.

      As for the kids bit, I have to wonder what really went on. You're believing the story of a bunch of kids, who have every reason to lie, and you're basing it on the fact that the police acted properly within their legal limitations by keeping as much commentary OUT of the media as possible (something, I assure you, the chickenshit-little types who love to sue police departments never do: they always want to try the case in the media, rather than a courtroom where facts actually matter).

      Your attempted insinuation that only those "hopped up on cocaine" are susceptible to fatal consequences from tasers is laughable. A countless number of situations, circumstances, and medical conditions could put someone at risk of fatal injury from high voltage electric shock. All police officers have to keep this in mind when they are considering employing such means to subdue a suspect.

      Please, please don't get me wrong. If a suspect is attempting to attack and officer or someone else, I have absolutely no problem with tasers being used! In fact, in some cases, with the kind of evil criminals that are out on their streets, I wish sometimes that there was no less lethal solution to be utilized and we could avoid the trouble of a trial with a trip to the morgue. (I'm not condoning murder, just a shortcut to justice.)

      Oh please. The cases we have seen in lawsuits in our area are never the "oops they have a health condition" sort. They are the "this guy was drugged up so far that even after 8 taser hits he STILL DIDN'T FUCKING FALL OVER, and the NAACP is suing on behalf of his family because they don't like the fact that a black druggie with a knife/gun got tasered" sort.

      I am very appreciative of those good police who approach their jobs with humility and respect for others. I understand the risks they incur to protect the rest of us. I'm not sure that the 'vast majority', as you say, approach their jobs in this manner. I wish they did. I think that the police who treat people with respect, until they lose that right, will most times receive the same in return. If you are a police officer as I suspect, do you really have a problem finding people who appreciate what you do? I really can't imagine that being true. Unless you're out there throwing the book at everyone while being disrespectful. Why don't you try and think about how you'd act if someone acted toward you the same way you act toward them?

      I'm not a cop. I do, however, have multiple friends and family members who are in that line of work.

      I have participated in ride-alongs (citizen outreach program). I have seen, firsthand, what kind of behavior they get from anyone at all in the neighborhoods they are assigned. This is not a racial thing - if anything, the predominant attitude a black/hispanic seems to have towards a black/hispanic cop is to

    100. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      Oh I understand just fine.

      We have the second amendment and being a cop isn't a particularly dangerous job and not dangerous really at all once you account for traffic accidents. We had the second amendment back when most all cops carried a 38 special 6 shot revolver and it was a relatively safe job then as well. Prior to 1934 their adverseries could easily and legally get their hand on fully automatic weapons, no $200 tax stamp and no CLEO approval, and cops were still fairly safe. If we had strict gun control I suspect whatever small cop shooting criminal element there is wouldn't be deterred in using firearms against a cop given that by definition they've already demonstrated a willingness to break the law.

      What vastly superior weapons do you think are routinely used against cops? The USMC gave me a bolt action rifle and a pistol and sent me off traipsing around Fallujah while a war was going on, and I didn't feel outgunned. I doubt the average cop faces much more danger than I did and the statistics bear that out.

      I'm not for cops not having guns I just think the training and tools they receive don't reflect the reality of their jobs. You are more likely to run into a mentally ill homeless guy than a machine gun toting psychopath, so stop fretting over which drop leg rig lets you transition to your secondary the fastest and spend that time figuring out how to do the actual job that you'll actually be doing.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    101. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are aware that police are able to do their jobs in many countries without access to firearms on a daily basis at all.

      And which of those countries allows their citizens to own weapons? I would think that Police here are more likely to come across an armed nut job than Police in Japan.

    102. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      If you believe a person is corrupt for risking their lives to protect others from harm ... then your a prime example of the pathetic human animal you project onto those officers. Look in the damn mirror, thats who you should be hating.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    103. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on the way they actually use their tazer, yes I'm inclined to think that they are too quick to rely on it.

      Do their job for a while, then if you have the same opinion it might be worth something.

      That's like saying "As a builder I find that building laws about safety are too complicated, so I'll just disregard them. If you're not a builder you wouldn't understand."
      Extend to any occupation where your actions can have direct adverse consequences for others.

    104. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how your comment has anything to do with the discussion.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    105. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      hat's like saying "As a builder I find that building laws about safety are too complicated, so I'll just disregard them. If you're not a builder you wouldn't understand."

      No thats not the same thing at all. A correct analogy would be the builder builds something to code, something unforeseen happens to damage the structure and some uniformed idiot walks by and said 'stupid builders if they would just build these things right this wouldn't happen!'

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    106. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      Because people who dedicate themselves to the service of others, the improvement of their community, and betterment of society are stupid fascist pigs, and should be treated as such.

      Such people are great. It would be wonderful if we could get a bunch of them on the police force. Of course that would take high pay (meaning higher taxes), high professional standards for general education, specific training, and accountability (meaning resistance from current cops who wouldn't make the cut), and a decent and reasonable set of laws for them to enforce.

      So instead we mostly get a bunch of under-educated, intellectually dull, poorly trained wannabe action heroes who think in black-and-white terms (philosophically and, often, racially) and get a kick out of beating up the "bad guys" -- generally, anyone who doesn't conform to social norms or who questions cop authority.

      Occasionally, by accident, an intelligent, humane, dedicated public servant ends up on a major police force -- rare, but it happens just often enough that I try to assume any given cop I encounter might be one of this minority, until proven otherwise. But these folks generally burn out in a few years, and either quit or come to behave just like the majority of dullards.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    107. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here in Texas, we are allowed to protect our lives and our property from those who would take them without permission. If he trespasses and drowns in my pool he took care of the work for me.

      and while there are abuses of power in all professions (ever piss off your building janitor?) most cops will risk their lives to save yours

    108. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Give me a break. The tazer was supposed to replace the handgun so that you don't need to actually kill the person. The reality is that officers use the tazer in situations where the handgun would never be an option. An elderly lady disagreeing with you is not an excuse for several thousand volts, I don't give a shit how much experience you have. The "don't taze me bro" guy is a perfect example - he was being a dick, but it was nothing that 2 officers and a pair of handcuffs couldn't handle.

      But hey, if you're the type of guy who thinks that only the police are able to give oversight to the police, then I'm sure we disagree on things more serious than tazer usage.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    109. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      if some guy barges into your house with the intent of killing you, do you really have the gun loaded and next to you

      The time required to get the phone, dial 911, ask the operator to send cops, and wait for cops to arrive, is an order of magnitude greater than the time to get my revolver out of the lockbox and loaded.

      And yes, when my housemate was being stalked, whenever I was home I kept the gun out and loaded and near me at all times for a week or so, until Baltimore County's finest got around to arresting the dangerous loon in question.

      Not only that but the chances of you needing a gun to protect yourself is extremely slim

      The chances of me needing a fire extinguisher or a smoke detector are extremely slim. I have them anyway, because it's better to have emergency tools and never need them, than to need them and not have them.

      The chances of me needing a handgun or a rifle to protect myself and my neighbors against common criminals, or against rioters, terrorists, tyrants, or whatever, are extremely slim. I have them anyway, because it's better to have emergency tools and never need them, than to need them and not have them.

      Odds are far higher that you will die of a heart attack, but how many people have automatic defibrulators in their home?

      Quite a lot, actually. They're called" pacemakers" or "implantable cardioverter defibrillators".

      And the relative odds of suffering a violent crime versus a fatal heart attack vary widely by socioeconomic status. In some inner-city neighborhoods, young men don't expect to live long enough for heart disease to be a problem.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    110. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      But these folks generally burn out in a few years, and either quit or come to behave just like the majority of dullards.

      Generally, huh? How many data points are you working on? How many cops do you personally know?

      Does bad-mouthing those you deem beneath you make you feel better about yourself?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    111. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      How many data points are you working on? How many cops do you personally know?

      In terms of judging the educational qualifications or training requirements for police officers, how many cops I know personally is irrelevant.

      A national commission recommended back in 1973 that a bachelor's degree be made a minimum requirement for entry-level police officers. But few police forces have done so; most require only a high school diploma, or perhaps two years of college. Some departments disqualify people for being overly intelligent. Those are simply facts, and they do not indicate a profession seeking to attract the best and brightest intellects.

      But in terms of personal experience with cops, let's see. Outside of traffic stops, there's my brother's ex-girlfriend's father, who -- the first and only time I met him -- bragged about how he administered some "street justice" to a purse snatcher who tried to run.

      There was the karate instructor who was a cop, who I met at a martial arts get-together, and who after a few beers told us a story about how police really do have the hypocritical (he didn't call it that, of course) "courtesy" of letting their fellow cops break speed limits. No wonder then that some Maryland cops feel that they can ignore the speed cameras they use on us.

      Then there's the group of Baltimore City's finest who showed up while I was trying to trying to keep a street disturbance from breaking out into a major fight -- and who promptly grabbed someone who wasn't involved and slammed him up against the wall, and assaulted another guy who protested.

      Then there's the very intelligent, dedicated, peace-loving fellow I know who joined the Baltimore City Police with great hope because he wanted to do something about the city's violence problem. Last time I talked to him, his eyes were half-dead, his idealism almost gone, and I have to hope he quits before the bastards grind him down and turn him into yet another bad cop.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    112. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      But few police forces have done so; most require only a high school diploma, or perhaps two years of college.

      Because they wouldn't be able to find enough applicants in most jurisdictions. Many offer bonuses for degrees however.

      And somehow in all that anecdotal evidence and random links, I missed the connection between non-genius IQs correlating to being an asshole, and how raising the IQ of police officers would alleviate the abuse of power. What does one have to do with another? Or, again, is this about feeling better about your high IQ?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    113. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...some uniformed idiot walks by and said 'stupid builders if they would just build these things right this wouldn't happen!'

      Wasn't the uniformed idiots the problem in the first place? :)

    114. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      And who will then either...
      1) ...tell you that it's not his job, to fix your little problems! (Actually happened to a friend of mine!)
      2) ...come over, find nothing, and bill you for making a prank call.
      3) ...run out of your house with as much stolen stuff as he can carry.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    115. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by leetwanker · · Score: 1

      No, your post is moronic.

      Some people just can't be reasoned with, no matter what anyone says and how much evidence is provided, their mind is made up, and can never be changed. Which made me wonder if I should either bother responding, but since it's not your mind that will be changed, maybe someone else's will.

      Think what you want about the ACLU and the NAACP, but the fact is, they're trying to fight for people's rights that so often get trampled.

      Bullshit. They stopped fighting for the rights of anyone but criminals 20 years ago. They have actually been involved in suing homeowners for injuries suffered BY BURGLARS.

      Due to the nature of its legal work, the ACLU is often involved in litigation against governmental bodies. The bulk of the ACLU's cases involve the First Amendment, Equal Protection, due process, and the right to privacy. It has also taken positions on other issues such as religious liberty, drug decriminalization, separation of church and state, freedom of speech, abolition of capital punishment, access to contraception and abortion, civil rights for gays, affirmative action (which is the only thing I don't agree with), the rights of defendants and suspects against unconstitutional police practices, privacy issues, immigrants rights, and gun control.

      I can see how you, most certainly being a republican, would have a problem with this organization. Being a democrat that is governed by reason, not religion, I consider this to be a very heroic organization. Someone has to be defending the constitution while people like George W. Bush call it "Just a damn piece of paper". I consider anyone who's an enemy of the ACLU to be an enemy of our country's Constitution which I consider to be the most important document to our freedom. And anyone who's an enemy of the Constitution is an enemy of our country.

      The old lady who was being unruly on the side of the road could have easily been restrained and handcuffed, but instead, she was tased. Another incident that got me mad as hell was an incident in Southern Illinois at a state home for orphaned children. The cops went in and tased three minors, threatened one with sodomy, held a 17 year-old girl up against a wall by her neck while the cop asked if she wanted to live or die. Now I concede that as there's no video of this incident there's no way of knowing if that's the truth or not, but as the police department only responded with, "the officers acted appropriately", that's the only side I have to go by.

      Yawn. In the first place, the "old lady" bit? I've seen the video. She was tased to prevent her from running into traffic and getting her ass run over.

      Silly me for thinking he could've just grabbed her and pulled her away. But then again, I'm just a big ol' dummy.

      As for the kids bit, I have to wonder what really went on. You're believing the story of a bunch of kids, who have every reason to lie, and you're basing it on the fact that the police acted properly within their legal limitations by keeping as much commentary OUT of the media as possible (something, I assure you, the chickenshit-little types who love to sue police departments never do: they always want to try the case in the media, rather than a courtroom where facts actually matter).

      When you're being attacked in public, it's generally a good idea to get out your side of the story, lest people only have one side to go off of. I'd like nothing more than for it not to be true, but we'll never really know until there's been a real investigation, which I've asked representatives, senators, and the governor to initiate. Doesn't it trouble you that it might be true, and the police department is just hoping that it'll go away?

      Your attempted insinuation that only those "hopped up on cocaine" are susceptible to fatal consequences from tasers is laughable. A countless number of si

    116. Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! by leetwanker · · Score: 1

      The first two are from Canada, I have a feeling a lot of things are better in Canada, but I don't live there. Let's talk about the state of things in the US. The third link is from Connecticut, but it's just a report comparing two sets of recommendations. Neither are rules or regulations that are in effect. I guess Connecticut is actually looking at implementing some, which is good news. "You asked us to compare the guidelines for Taser use recommended by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) with those recommended by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF). "

  3. nice stereotype. by gandhi_2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The first thing you can imagine the officer asked was, "What's a domain?".

    Right before the cop knocked your pocket-protector-wearing geek ass out.

    1. Re:nice stereotype. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Gandhi has some of the best quotes of any man ever.

      "I'm hungry."

      "My feet hurt."

  4. What he actually did by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Quoth TFA:

    Daniel Goncalves, the 25 year old law firm computer technician arrested on Thursday, reportedly hacked in to the Angelâ(TM)s AOL email account, used that information to retrieve the login details for the P2P.com from the Godaddy.com domain account. Goncalves performed an internal âoedomain pushâ transfer,which in effect transfered the domain name to another Godaddy account that he owned. Goncalves reportedly also falsified Paypal.com transaction records in an attempt to cover his trail and provide evidence that made it appear that he purchased the domain name for $900 from the Angels. The domain was listed in the name of Daniel Louvado during this time period (a bogus name consisting of Goncalves first name and his fiances last name).

    In late 2006, Goncalves put the domain name P2P.com up for sale on eBay.com and on September 24, 2006 the eBay.com auction for the domain P2P.com closed in the amount of $111,000.

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:What he actually did by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      How'd he falsify paypal records? You wouldn't think that's a smart move, as it only adds evidence of intent and further charges... and then to put it in your wife's last name?

          He deserved to be caught. Ballsy little fucker worked for a law firm? Yikes. Wonder what he's had his hand in there?

  5. Come on... by CWRUisTakingMyMoney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The first thing you can imagine the officer asked was, "What's a domain?"

    I get it! Cops are all dumb, lazy, and technically illiterate!

    Seriously, everyone. I know we all resent cops, but to imply that a whole department can't find a single officer who knows what a domain is is ridiculous and insulting. Let's try to keep our government/authority-hate at least sort of grounded in reality.

    --
    Those who anthropomorphize science and/or nature already believe in an intelligent designer.
    1. Re:Come on... by Roogna · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You know, it didn't sound like they were trying to imply the cop was dumb. But that the legal system itself isn't able to redirect these kinds of reported crimes to the proper people within. Such as this, where for a domain name theft, they sent a officer, to the door of a house. Obviously that would be his first question, because he was the incorrect layer of law enforcement to even have responded to such a report, not because he was dumb. Now on the flip side, they probably shouldn't have been calling local police over it in the first place, but instead probably (and this is my guess, I may very well be incorrect myself) the FBI. But that's more the point, depending on the "crime" one may have to contact any of a number of different places and it's not all that clear, I think even to law enforcement professionals, let alone those -not- in law enforcement, on who to contact for what.

    2. Re:Come on... by SeeSp0tRun · · Score: 1

      Some departments don't even have Active Directory yet. I would expect those are the ones which are being referred to.

      --
      Something witty.
    3. Re:Come on... by Anonymously+Brave · · Score: 1

      The author didn't make these generalizations. You are going out on a limb here. The point is that there is no real "go to" person/place/entity that enforces the law in cyberspace. Who do you call if you did have a domain stolen? This can happen to anyone. Regardless of whether one police officer knew what a domain name was or not , it's clear in this story that there's no real easy way to get a domain name back once it is is stolen.

    4. Re:Come on... by Jeng · · Score: 1

      The majority of people I know would not know what you mean when you tell them that your domain was stolen, the average response would be "What's a domain?" Followed shortly by, "How in the hell do you steal a domain?"

      Its not a cop specific response. In fact you can consider it a technical legal question, "What is the legal definition of a domain and how does it apply to this case?" may sound less insulting but it is the same question.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    5. Re:Come on... by Ggiant · · Score: 1

      Seriously, everyone. I know we all resent cops, but to imply that a whole department can't find a single officer who knows what a domain is is ridiculous and insulting. Let's try to keep our government/authority-hate at least sort of grounded in reality.

      I was going to say the same thing. Okay, maybe in 1999 or 2000 that would have been funny and appropriate but saturation is nearly complete as far as web use goes and I'm pretty sure that most cops, generally being 25-55 years old and living in the same society as the rest of us, are quite aware how the internet works.

    6. Re:Come on... by Dunbal · · Score: 2

      Let's try to keep our government/authority-hate at least sort of grounded in reality.

            Yes, we should all just roll over and pretend to be happy when criminal charges are brought against breaches of civil law. It's the new game in the US, has been for the past decade or so. I'm happy that the rate of violent crime in the US is so low that law enforcement has time to tase 70 year olds because their sons were speeding, tase and pepper spray epileptics having seizures, and arrest people for "stealing" a domain name.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    7. Re:Come on... by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Its easy to make these jokes when they have been known to actively turn down applicants with high IQs.

      --
      Good-bye
    8. Re:Come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      to imply that a whole department can't find a single officer who knows what a domain is is ridiculous and insulting

      Actually, it sounds to me like they don't know they need a technical person. Ok, I can live with that... but what happens when you accidentally get transferred to the police department and you have a medical emergency? If you told the person at the other end of the wire that you were suffering from a disease, they would probably do the same thing: send some random police officer on the site to investigate. He's the one that should find out as much as possible about the reported crime scene EVEN if it's an emergency or not. They're risking our lives by being illiterate.

      PS: What's your badge number?

    9. Re:Come on... by pmarini · · Score: 1

      more like misappropriation than theft then...

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    10. Re:Come on... by 2obvious4u · · Score: 1

      Why even the FBI? Can't you make a complaint to ICANN and have them resolve the dispute? Also since it was a godaddy account that was hacked, couldn't they also complain to godaddy?

    11. Re:Come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if they were smart enough to know what a domain is, why aren't they smart enough to not be a cop?

    12. Re:Come on... by Repossessed · · Score: 1

      ICANN will only respond to trademark disputes.

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
    13. Re:Come on... by syousef · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    14. Re:Come on... by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      Its easy to make these jokes when they have been known to actively turn down applicants with high IQs.

      Just being smart is not enough. Do you think they would/should accept Stephen Hawking for a street cop if he applied?

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    15. Re:Come on... by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Bulls***. 99% of the users of the Internet don't know jack about how it works. Slashdot is not a representative sample.

    16. Re:Come on... by SlashDev · · Score: 1

      Actually it is difficult to find a police officer who know what DNS is. We're not talking about computer literacy here, of course most cops are computer literate. We are talking something that is not mainstream, where most of the population doesn't know what a domain or DNS is.

      --

      TOP DSLR Cameras Reviews of the top DSLRs
    17. Re:Come on... by SlashDev · · Score: 1

      Side note: I don't think people hate cops, I think they love to hate them unfortunately, but I truly think they realize that without cops, we would be living in anarchy.

      --

      TOP DSLR Cameras Reviews of the top DSLRs
    18. Re:Come on... by Cramer · · Score: 2, Informative

      If what I've read is true, he commited several crimes... breaking into the AOL account (computer trespass) to gain access to the godaddy account (computer trespass, fraud, wire fraud, ...), creating false transactions to cloud the picture and give the false impression that the domain was bought (fraud, banking fraud, CC fraud, ...) -- not sure what was involved there, and then sold the stolen property on ebay for a huge profit. This is indeed a matter for criminal court.

    19. Re:Come on... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      GoDaddy told them they should have protected themselves better. FWIW, he hacked into the owner's AOL email account in order to get access to their GoDaddy account.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    20. Re:Come on... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I get it! Cops are all dumb, lazy, and technically illiterate!

      Seriously, everyone. I know we all resent cops, but to imply that a whole department can't find a single officer who knows what a domain is is ridiculous and insulting. Let's try to keep our government/authority-hate at least sort of grounded in reality.

      I find it very interesting that your defense of the intelligence of the police is to insist that there surely must have been an officer somewhere in the department who knew what a 'domain' is.

      Rather than pointing out that knowing what a 'domain' is and being smart are not even close to the same thing, because the meaning of "domain" we're looking for is, well, domain-specific.

      I would expect that a great many highly intelligent and well-educated people have no idea what a 'domain' is in the context of computing.

      Basically, your response makes it sound like if you couldn't find an officer who knew, that would justify disparaging them. Whereas I simply think it's what you would expect -- the police know a lot of terminology involved with doing their job, and probably don't know so much about doing our job. I think it's quite probable that there are many police departments that couldn't pass your test, but I don't think that makes them dumb.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    21. Re:Come on... by Jack9 · · Score: 1

      The Secret Service typically handles cases hacking and online fraud. If you are unfortunate enough to witness, experience, perpetrate electronic credit card theft, you might get to find out.

      --

      Often wrong but never in doubt.
      I am Jack9.
      Everyone knows me.
    22. Re:Come on... by leetwanker · · Score: 1
      Wow that's infuriating. I can't believe that the city/state is allowed to discriminate against people like this and for the courts to be okay with it... They can legally discriminate just as long as they discriminate against enough people. Absolutely unbelievable.

      I wish some brilliant attorney would take this to the supreme court for him pro-bono so that there would be precedence and nobody else would try this sort of thing. I gotta say, at least someone reported it. Friggin' America...

  6. one domain, if you might remember. by KZigurs · · Score: 1

    sex.com

  7. Intricies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suppose intricies is the plural of intrex. So what is an intrex?

    1. Re:Intricies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Opposite of extrex.

    2. Re:Intricies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A shortened form of intern-sex?

    3. Re:Intricies? by Niris · · Score: 1

      Bill Clinton is making up words now?

  8. DNN? by neonprimetime · · Score: 3, Informative

    Is anybody else in shock that there is actually a website devoted entirely to Domain Name News?

    1. Re:DNN? by French+Mailman · · Score: 1

      If there is a big enough market for domain name news, it might be interesting to try and steal that domain name!

    2. Re:DNN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idotz.net retweets it all the time >>'

    3. Re:DNN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idotz.net retweets it all the time >>'

      I read your post as saying...
      Idiotz.net retweets it all the time >>'

    4. Re:DNN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I recently spoke at a conference of domain name peoples, groups, and companies. A bit of humor was in the fact that when someone introduced themselves to me it was rarely about what they had done in life. Rather, they'd come up and say things like "I have oven-dot-com." It was like a competition to own the best domain names. I actually enjoyed it though, and they did have good sessions on developing domains.

    5. Re:DNN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      damn thats a sweet domain name, I think I'll steal it

    6. Re:DNN? by theskipper · · Score: 1

      I thought the same after stumbling onto it in 2007. Now it seems surprising that that there is surprise, especially after the mainstream coverage of ireport.com, toys.com and property.com sales.

      So if you're interested, check out http://www.dnjournal.com/ and look at the "Domain Sales" and "YTD Sales Charts".

      http://www.dnforum.com/ is the largest forum for domaining.

      http://www.domainnamewire.com/ is an insightful news source.

      http://www.namebio.com/ is fun to peruse for past sales.

      Auctions for drops and end-user sales are at http://www.snapnames.com/ http://www.namejet.com/ and Godaddy's TDNAM service. http://www.sedo.com/ and http://afternic.com/ are mostly end user sales/auctions.

      Then continue onto http://www.ricksblog.com/ and finally http://www.domaining.com./

      There's plenty of other sites to surf and and never ceases to be interesting. There's even a book ("The Domain Game") that's a good read from a historical perspective.

      It's a tough, relatively unknown and tight-knit business. But a burgeoning business nonetheless.

    7. Re:DNN? by SolitaryMan · · Score: 1

      Even more shock: seems they have like 2-3 news per week to report! Now, THAT is creativity!

      --
      May Peace Prevail On Earth
  9. Headline should read... by arcsimm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Sleazy Well-Funded Ex-Attorney Domain Name Speculator Pushes Arrest Of Crooked Hacker." Seriously, the victim here is a cybersquatter.

    1. Re:Headline should read... by Anonymously+Brave · · Score: 1

      Hundreds of businesses and individuals have had domains stolen. Guess they're all sleaze too.

    2. Re:Headline should read... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, I was thinking that too. There really aren't any good guys in this case.

      I know it would open up a huge can of worms, but I've often thought that domain name ownership ought to be like land owenership under the Homestead Act. That is, if you're the first person to apply for a domain, you get it for free, but you have to "improve" it, i.e., do something with it other than just sitting on it and hoping someone will pay you a bunch of money, in a certain amount of time or you don't get to keep it. Impractical, I know, but the whole idea of domain name squatting is just irritating as hell.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:Headline should read... by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      Don't bother reading the article since you can obviously divine truth from the summary. But, excuse us mere mortals for thinking this is actually a case of theft since the victim hacked an account and stole login information.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    4. Re:Headline should read... by arcsimm · · Score: 1

      I don't mena to diminish the problem, or make implications about the other victims. But it looks like the only reason this one ended in an arrest is because the victim was a former legal professional with financial backing and a significant monetary interest in maintaining his, err, portfolio.

    5. Re:Headline should read... by dhermann · · Score: 1

      The poor, innocent, AOL-mail-hacking, Paypal-record-falsifying, cybersquatter, you mean? The one whose defense is that he says he convinced three domain speculators to sell a domain for which they paid $160,000 to him for $900? Yeah, he's totally the victim.

    6. Re:Headline should read... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      GPP never said that everyone who gets a domain name stolen is sleazy. He did say that these particular guys who got their domain name stolen are sleazy, and as far as it's possible to tell from the TFA, he's right.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    7. Re:Headline should read... by thedonger · · Score: 1

      Some time ago I was looking for some PHP code help and found a promising-looking forum. Turns out it was mostly buying and selling domain names. These people improve the domains in terms of SEO and page rank, but in reality it is all a load of crap after the domain switches hands a few times, gets a way, way trumped up price, and eventually some fool has paid way too much based on perceived value. Gee, sounds a lot like the real estate market bust...

      --
      Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
    8. Re:Headline should read... by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      No, he's saying the speculators that he stole the domain from (and unlike, say, copyright infringement, someone was deprived of their use of the intellectual property, therefore, it was theft,) are the victims, but that they're sleazy for being speculators.

    9. Re:Headline should read... by ultraexactzz · · Score: 1

      Seriously, the victim here is a cybersquatter.

      I agree, except that the cybersquatter is apparently a multi-millionaire professional athlete. So, I expect very little sympathy for him.

      --
      Never underestimate the potential of Human stupidity. -Heinlein
    10. Re:Headline should read... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Cybersquatter.

      Cyber is computer related, I got that.

      Squat is what females do to releive bladder pressure.

      Cybersquatter. Hmm. Computers now come in genders? This gives a whole new meaning to "next gen"! I can breed my own computers!!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    11. Re:Headline should read... by dhermann · · Score: 1

      Madsen is the guy who bought the domain from the thief. Brief glance at the article before posting, k?

    12. Re:Headline should read... by GaryOlson · · Score: 1

      "Improve" has that "value-added we can tax it" implication. Let's not give the government ideas. I prefer a more modest definition which frameworks actively using the domain name for legal, mundane activities. How we define pump-n-dump domain name marketing as illegal is the hard part.

      --
      Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
    13. Re:Headline should read... by discord5 · · Score: 1

      That is, if you're the first person to apply for a domain, you get it for free, but you have to "improve" it

      And thus the "Under construction" sign finally makes sense. But really now, I've got several domains for several purposes, and most of them have an empty index.html but have content in a subdirectory limited to certain users (think subversion repositories, wikis for projects, etc etc).

      What exactly constitutes "improving" a domain?

  10. Rebuttal by eldavojohn · · Score: 1, Troll

    The first thing you can imagine the officer asked was, "What's a domain?" I get it! Cops are all dumb, lazy, and technically illiterate! Seriously, everyone. I know we all resent cops, but to imply that a whole department can't find a single officer who knows what a domain is is ridiculous and insulting. Let's try to keep our government/authority-hate at least sort of grounded in reality.

    Officer A: So then I pull up to this house, knock on the door and this 50 year old woman answers the door. I think I got the wrong house but you know those tech nerds ...
    Officer B: Still living in his mother's basement?
    Officer A: Yeah, dude's whiter than paste and has maybe 90 lbs of meat on him. So I'm cuffing the guy and putting his head down so he gets into the car and the kid feels like a noodle and I say, 'Ya know you should try illegally downloading P90X.' and you can imagine the first thing he asked was, 'What the hell is P90X?'
    Officer B: Hahaha, those hacker nerds, man if only they got laid more often instead of stealing a 'domain'--whatever that is.
    Officer A: Yeah, now they expect us to police virtual property too ... where will it end?

    There, now everybody's made fun of everybody. Feel better?

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Rebuttal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I enjoyed that, an easy read and funny. Thanks, sir.

    2. Re:Rebuttal by lorenlal · · Score: 1

      Is it bad that I have no idea what a P90X is?

    3. Re:Rebuttal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Is it bad that I have no idea what a P90X is?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P90X

    4. Re:Rebuttal by just_another_sean · · Score: 1

      Ah closure. thank you.

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    5. Re:Rebuttal by pmarini · · Score: 1

      it's the Pentium @ 90MHz with the floating point error in the firmware... :-)

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    6. Re:Rebuttal by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Unless you watch a lot of infomercials at 3-4am, I doubt most of the world knows what P90X is.

    7. Re:Rebuttal by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Whatever it is, I have a feeling it's not this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_P90

      --
      What?
    8. Re:Rebuttal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it is wonderful. If you knew, it would haves screwed up the joke. Now, go download it.

  11. What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalves? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalves? Is he Hispanic?

  12. I've heard they are all racist, too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But that's just what I've heard.

  13. Obligatory grammar Nazism by bwintx · · Score: 3, Informative

    Several references to "Angel's" in TFA should be "Angels'," meaning the possessive form of the plural proper noun Angels.

    So much for my positive karma... [sigh]

    --
    Discussion System prefs link: http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=editcomm
    1. Re:Obligatory grammar Nazism by bwintx · · Score: 1

      Even more onerous -- a grammar-Nazi reply to myself. I should have punctuated that so it would say:

      Several references to "Angel's" in TFA should be "Angels'" -- meaning ...

      --
      Discussion System prefs link: http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=editcomm
    2. Re:Obligatory grammar Nazism by GaryOlson · · Score: 1

      Dude, please put down the Dictionary, stop inhaling the lead base ink, and take a walk outside. The fresh air could make a difference!

      --
      Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
  14. A slightly different way to resolve this by Rastl · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Mind you, I heard the story from the person who had the domain name stolen and then returned. The story may have been embellished for effect. But it's still darn good.

    Someone I know owns a highly profitable and highly desirable domain name for shall we say, marital aids. He got smart and registered it in the early days and it's very much a thriving site. One day, someone stole it along with about a dozen other highly profitable domains.

    This gentleman contacted some of the other victims and they were willing to help out with catching who did this and with getting their domains back.

    The thieves were employees of Network Solutions and had planned on skipping the country very soon after the incidents. However, the victims pooled their money and hired a 'bounty hunter' to track down and find the thieves. He did, and for a little extra money the domains were returned without question.

    The person who told me the story has been silent on what happened to the thieves. He's leaving that to the imagination but I have a feeling they're at least quite sorry that they tried this stunt.

    I think that was much more satisfying than going through the court systems, etc. Not that I endorse taking the law into your own hands but when the courts aren't set up to deal with this type of crime sometimes you have to deal with it through side channels.

    1. Re:A slightly different way to resolve this by pmarini · · Score: 2, Insightful

      it's funny to notice that it's exactly like this that the Mafia started... providing state-like "services" from "alternate" sources... and then the people became "addicted" to them... and now it lives on... from within :-)

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
  15. Domains for Cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come down and sell us your unwanted domain names! Domains for Cash at Good Ol'e Toms.

  16. Worth Noting by cl0secall · · Score: 1

    I thought it was worth noting that it took a former DOJ prosecutor and investor to "bring this guy down", and even then, it was an uphill battle.

    --
    Model 551, Chambered in 6mm
  17. Black Box Network Services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Network security should ensure that authorized users get convenient and easy access to information, while preventing unauthorized access or tampering. There are many ways to improve network security through basic physical security. Products such as biometric authentication, locking cabinets, security cameras, KVM switches and choosing fiber cable over copper cable, all aid in keeping private information private. Use a surge protector to protect your equipment from over voltages that can damage your delicate electronic equipment. A solid network security plan can be found on the Black Box Network Services white paper on physical network security: http://tinyurl.com/nsflf7

  18. Poor passwords, poor password procedures... by hattig · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And this is why businesses shouldn't email out customer passwords in emails.

    I get angry every time I get an email sayign "thanks for joining, your password is : xtyzseh85". REALLY? Like I just didn't enter that on your site. Also it suggests that the password is stored in clear text in their database, a big worry.

    What if you forget your password, you might ask? Well then you email out a temporary password, and set a flag in your database that the person is required to change their password when they log in. This vastly reduces the window of opportunity a thief would have (technically they could follow the "forgotten email?" path on the website, and intercept the emailed temporary password. Maybe the solution is temporary passwords sent by text to account holder phone, or one of those "what is your favourite colour?" questions before the password email is sent).

    Second issue - people using poor passwords. These people clearly had the keys to their $100k+ accounts available behind a paper screen door. Should we blame Yahoo! for this?

    Note that the crime is still entirely down to the criminal who did it, and not the people for having poor passwords, nor the registrar who allowed the domain transfer in good faith (although there must be questions asked about their notification procedures, the owners should have got an email about the transfer, and thus should have been able to get this sorted out BEFORE the domain auction was finished).

    1. Re:Poor passwords, poor password procedures... by hypergreatthing · · Score: 1

      Because in almost all the cases it's so very hard to change the password.

      Most of the time they email you when you forgot your password. It's your fault for not changing it after you can get into your account. Or can you suggest a better way to do this? snail mail you a new password? text you it?

    2. Re:Poor passwords, poor password procedures... by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      No, one time use password reset link.
      1) They only send you a link.
      2) You click on link, reset password to new value.
      3) Link no longer works after password reset.

      If link is not used to reset password withing an hour, it no longer works.

      No need to send password, ever.
      No need to store password in clear, ever.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    3. Re:Poor passwords, poor password procedures... by hattig · · Score: 1

      You force the person to change it when they next login after you've sent the email. You also timeout the temporary password after a day or less.

      And indeed, texting the password could be an option, although that would require the customer's phone number and would cost a little bit of money. However it's cheaper than handling a support phone call.

      You should never email a password that the customer will use on an ongoing basis. It should be a temporary token for resetting the password when they next log in.

    4. Re:Poor passwords, poor password procedures... by kayditty · · Score: 0

      I don't know if this has anything to do with what you're suggesting. if he had access to the AOL e-mail account, he could request a reset from GoDaddy, which is what I suspect happened. there's no "plaintext" stealing going on--that's not even necessary. how did he get access to the AOL account? well, it's an AOL account.. I'm sure the password wasn't that difficult to figure out, or it could be social engineering.

      and I don't want to libel anyone or anything, because I have no idea, but I do know this guy, and he worked for AOL at one point, and he maintained AOL contacts long after leaving. he's been able to do malicious things with AOL accounts before; I've seen him do so.

    5. Re:Poor passwords, poor password procedures... by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Also it suggests that the password is stored in clear text in their database, a big worry.

      Wow. What kind of idiots would store passwords in clear text?

    6. Re:Poor passwords, poor password procedures... by hattig · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the Slashdot password email (I assume it was you, your post time is the same as the email I received). At least Slashdot had the wherewithal to generate a random password and email it to me.

      And yes, someone who has privileged access is another issue.

      So yeah, stick the "What's your pet's name?" question that most sites use as an insecurity measure on the Request Password function, making the job of the attacker more difficult - you need both access to the email account, and to know something about the person you are attacking.

      (Yes, I know the email account is probably littered with pictures of darling little Tibbles and the exact above wouldn't work either.)

      By the way, you might want to contact the police handling this case with that information. And probably AOL as well.

    7. Re:Poor passwords, poor password procedures... by kayditty · · Score: 0

      it certainly wasn't me. and I don't have enough concrete information to contact anyone about anything..

    8. Re:Poor passwords, poor password procedures... by hattig · · Score: 1

      Ah well, someone thought it would be funny! Somehow.

  19. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Goncalves (*) is a Portuguese or Brasilian surname. (*) the "c" should be a "c with cedilha" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedilla ) And your question was racist. What difference does it make the racial background of the accused.

  20. Of COURSE the government prosecuted the case: by davidsyes · · Score: 0

    It was a matter of IMMINENT (and EMINENT) domain.... Otherwise they'd be abandoning claim over a landmark case... Besides domain thieves, it has to worry about domain/cyber squatters complicating the land rush...

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  21. Why we need to break the govt's monopoly by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To move the case forward, they would also need a law enforcement professional who understands the case or is willing to take the time to learn.

    This may come as a real shock to a lot of Americans, but it used to be that if you and your attorney could make a reasonable argument to a general district court judge that a crime had been committed, YOU could bring criminal charges. You and your attorney would be the prosecution.

    *Cue platitudes about our litigious society*

    The general posse comitatus approach was superior to what we have today. It had its abuses, but people tend to not grasp just how utterly powerless they are today to get wrongs corrected, to fight back against corruption, etc. In this day, it is literally impossible to bring charges against the powerful without the support of other powerful people who are sympathetic to your argument. Back in the day, if a powerful man were hiding behind his wealth and cronies, 20 armed men could haul him out of his house, shoot up the sheriff if he were on the take, and dump the SOB in a court if they had evidence.

    1. Re:Why we need to break the govt's monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And what do you think the RIAA would do at the first whiff of this being legal again?

    2. Re:Why we need to break the govt's monopoly by pnewhook · · Score: 2, Informative

      Having a policy like loser pays legal bills of both sides would go a long way to making the court system fair. Right now its often richest guy wins because he can outlast the poor guy.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    3. Re:Why we need to break the govt's monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem being, that the same wealthy man could hire 20 goons to drag you out of your house, shoot up the sherrif if he wasn't on the take, and dump you in a court if they had the cash.

    4. Re:Why we need to break the govt's monopoly by dkf · · Score: 1

      Having a policy like loser pays legal bills of both sides would go a long way to making the court system fair. Right now its often richest guy wins because he can outlast the poor guy.

      You still have the system in place to do that, you know. The judge could make a ruling in equity (I think that's the right term) that the loser should pay the winner's reasonable costs. Indeed, this is usually the case in UK courts and as I understand it there's enough similarity between legal systems for that to be potentially carriable-over. I've no idea why US courts don't seem to like to do it.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    5. Re:Why we need to break the govt's monopoly by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      No idea either. It should be that way be default, and I'd go further to say no one should be out of pocket until a ruling either way.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    6. Re:Why we need to break the govt's monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea! We should leave the policing to for-hire militia!

      er..wait, what?

  22. Wet Crime Over by mindbrane · · Score: 1

    "Don't do the crime, If you can't do the time." "S/he ain't worth the time." The latter one simply means if you're thinking about hurting someone for whatever reason make sure s/he is worth the time you might have to serve. Wet crimes are done by individuals for their own gain. There's no degree of separation between them and the crime. It's their hormones talking. In this case the guy stole a domain with a sexy name. The idea of the name had to juice him up to the point where he got stupid enough to try to pull it off first hand. A crime involving an amount over $X will usually put you in a different arena with much stiffer penalties. Petty criminals with drug habits shoplift all day every day and just wind their way in and out of court without much of a care. The real criminal profits are tied to our inability to rationally handle classes. Corporations routinely push the boundaries of criminal activity by playing off individual tied to criminal activity against the legal entity that is the corporation said criminals work for. Our inability to distinguish criminal activity by a class of people or an entity of a different class order is a virulent criminal ecological niche. Most corporations are also very adept at stealing or defrauding small amounts from each customer in a large customer base and thereby reaping huge criminal gains while forcing investigations for small $ amounts or calling for class action suits.

    --
    ideopath @ play
  23. Where's the FBI? by pmarini · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How is a local enforcement officer involved in a case of trademark/licensing/brand/virtualspace?

    Isn't this something that would have FBI jurisdiction, if anything - unless the "crime" requires the help of the Interpol/Europol...

    Questions:
    - How is this a theft? (I'm sure that Cisco didn't accuse Apple of "theft" for the iPhone name...)
    - How is this relevant in the XXI century? Surely it would take another couple of centuries before judges and juries would know anything about digital technologies... (no offence, but while I can understand the crime of falsifying financial transactions, I don't see a "theft" here... more like a joyride instead...)

    Have fun, the night is still joung!

    --
    Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
    Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    1. Re:Where's the FBI? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Well, for one thing, Apple didn't deprive Cisco of the use of the iPhone name.

      This guy did deprive the legitimate owners of the use of their domain names.

    2. Re:Where's the FBI? by Cramer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, that was a trademark case. And Apple sued Cisco (aka Linksys) who did not have a product on the market using the iPhone trademark.

  24. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Asking a question about the ethnicity of a name does not automatically make one a racist. If he would have followed up with "because Hispanics are known for stealing" then that would be a racist statement. Simply inquiring about someone's name is not racist in and amongst itself.

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  25. domain name theft? by alphatel · · Score: 1

    The fact that so few domain criminals are arrested is frightening at the least. I know of at least 20 domains stolen this past year which had open market value of over $10,000 and not a single charge could be brought forward on any of the thieves. Daniel must have been uber-stupid.

    --
    When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
    1. Re:domain name theft? by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Most go unprosecuted because it costs too much and is very hard to trace back to any real person. Add in jurisdictional boundries and you may find that they cannot be prosecuted if you do manage to find them. Most cases can be "easily" handled through whatever registrars are involved if it's dealt with immediately -- but it's still a long, ugly process.

  26. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Temujin_12 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Asking a question about the ethnicity of a name does not automatically make one a racist.

    I know. Calm down people. Go have some beers and make up.

    --
    Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
  27. grrrr by JackSpratts · · Score: 3, Interesting

    we had a domain stolen a few years ago at a board i mod. it was active and we lost all traffic instantly. like tfa it was also a p2p domain and also an email diversion. to get back up the admins registered "p2p-zone.com" and felt lucky to get it, but it wasn't the same. i was so po'd i wanted to throttle the arrogant nyc prick who did the snatch. instead i handed it off to the cops and eventually got it back through negotiation, but it took many months. it was our identity for years and we felt terrible when it was taken from us. what a pita. unfortunately because of the time that passed and a new name we were forced to adopt, we have never formally reincorporated it. we resolve to it but it really isn't "us" anymore as far as the public's concerned.

    - js.

  28. squatter!? by BOFslime · · Score: 1

    So you mean to tell me that some hacker swiped a domain from a known and self proclaimed squatter, and I'm supposed to care!? I should hand this Goncalves guy a metal (even though he may very well be a bragging fool). At the very least, I'm not going to feel sorry for Mr and Mrs Angel.

    1. Re:squatter!? by Cramer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm supposed to care!?

      Yes, you should. So when this happens to you, we'll apply the same logic... "you're a nobody. why should we care?"

    2. Re:squatter!? by kayditty · · Score: 0

      which metal would you like to hand him?

  29. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Racist, my ass. I've never seen or heard the name Goncalves used anywhere except in reference to this one guy. Surely the name isn't unique - it came from somewhere. GP posted, apparently wondering where it DID come from. Your post satisfied my curiosity about the origin of the name. Thank you for that.

    Beyond the origin of a name, there ARE TIMES when it helps to know an ethnic background. People all the time make reference to the fact that this an Ameri-centric board. Knowing ethnic background can tell as much about a person as knowing his nationality. If questioning Goncales' name is racist, then every bastid who identifies himself as American, or European, or Asian is a racist as well. Posters sometimes identify themselves as Protestant, Catholic, or Wiccan to help make a point, or to help understand a point. They must all be bigots of one type or another as well.

    Again - thanks for the info, but try not to judge the question. GP might be racist, but the question is neutral.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  30. What a stupid shit storm by Jeng · · Score: 1

    Seriously, you tell the average person that your domain name was stolen and they'll look at you like your speaking Martian.

    Big Fucking Deal, someone implied that a Police Officer may have as much of a grasp of how the internet works as the average person.

    When the Police send a uniformed Police Officer to your location after telling the police that your domain was stolen I would imagine that one question that would be asked would be "What is a domain?". This is not a jab at cops for being dumb, because they tend not to be dumb.

    There is more story here than the last 3 words in the summary, but you wouldn't know that from reading the comments.

    --
    Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    1. Re:What a stupid shit storm by Ironica · · Score: 1

      >

      When the Police send a uniformed Police Officer to your location after telling the police that your domain was stolen I would imagine that one question that would be asked would be "What is a domain?". This is not a jab at cops for being dumb, because they tend not to be dumb.

      If someone sent a police officer to your location after telling the police that your African Basengi was stolen, I would imagine the officer would ask, "What's a Basengi?"

      But I think the OP's jab was at IT professionals and how all-knowing they are. Next time I need to secure a crime scene, pursue a suspect, or arrest someone safely, I'll be sure to ask the nearest geek. ;-)

      Funny thing is, IT professionals (at the trenches level) and cops have similar pay. One has to know what a domain name is, the other how to use lethal force without getting locked up. I'm glad I've got the job that is less likely to get me killed. (And I'm sure glad I'm not a garbage collector.)

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    2. Re:What a stupid shit storm by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Well if I'm a cop, even if someone said something "Someone stole my domain", I'd have to verify that I heard correctly, and I'd also have to verify the _intended_ meaning of that sentence. Especially if they want me to come to their location...

      After all there are all sorts[1] of people in the world who might contact a police officer. It's hard to be sure what they actually said and meant.

      [1] Which is why it's a big problem if cops are often in scenarios where for their own safety they have to tase or assault people who appear to be uncooperative. There are lots of people who can appear uncooperative - they could be deaf for instance. Maybe in the Good Old Days the cops could approach the person and in more cases nobody ends up hurt.

      --
  31. what if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what if the slashdot admin that manages submissions had to spend the night in the drunk tank in jail for putting submissions on the front page that contain misinformation, i be 24 hours of living with belligerent drunkards would get their attention :D
    -

    anonymouse cowherder

  32. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Columcille · · Score: 1

    Actually, it would be a stereotyping statement, not a racist statement. If he followed your statement with, "and I hate Hispanics" - that would be racist.

    --
    I love my sig.
  33. RTFPA - the _victim_ is basically a cybersquatter by billstewart · · Score: 1

    The parent article wasn't saying that the AOL-hacking Paypal-record-falsifying thief was a poor victim. It was saying that the domain name speculator who the thief ripped off was in the scummy cybersquatting business himself.

    Domain names are supposed to let people who have actual interesting content make it findable and memorable by people who want to use those sites. Most of the "domainer" industry isn't taking names that are already in use (except by buying them right when they expire, taking advantage of sloppy or abusive registrars' renewal systems) - they're taking names that sound like they ought to be interesting, usually as search terms, and parking them with advertising pages or possibly putting up low-value content redirecting people to other web sites, either for the ad banners or a cut of those sites' advertising revenue. Sometimes the names they come up with are variants on existing businesses' domain names, or variants on product names, and often enough they're used by SEOs or other search space spammers as well.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  34. How is this "theft?" by bonch · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    According to Slashdot in every piracy article, this isn't "theft," because you're not taking anything physical. So I'm confused about the headline. Help me out, Slashdot.

    1. Re:How is this "theft?" by alx5000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      According to Slashdot in every piracy article, this is actually "theft", because you are taking away something from its rightful owner, who will not be able to make use of it any more. Thanks for playing.

      --
      My 0.02 cents
    2. Re:How is this "theft?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Slashdot in every piracy article, this isn't "theft," because you're not taking anything physical

      You're denying the legal domain holder use of the domain. Way to fail reading comprehension, the reason copyright infringement isn't theft is
      1) When you copy a song, the original copy works just as well
      2) The law doesn't define it as theft

    3. Re:How is this "theft?" by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      When your take a persons domain your are denying them something that is rightfully theirs.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    4. Re:How is this "theft?" by idlemachine · · Score: 1

      According to Slashdot in every piracy article, this isn't "theft," because you're not taking anything physical. So I'm confused about the headline.

      Did you notice it was based on the headline of TFA? And is the actual verdict laid out by the judge? It's not like slashdot tried him.

      You need to work on your straw-men, this one was pitiful.

    5. Re:How is this "theft?" by moxley · · Score: 1

      The only way your attempted analogy would work is if there was only *one* single digital file version of every song...

      See the difference? You can make a million copies of a song or video, and they all generally are just as useful as the original...You cannot do this with a domain name, hence someone is hurt, hence your analogy doesn't work.

    6. Re:How is this "theft?" by hedwards · · Score: 1

      That's not accurate. According to every article on piracy we say it's not "theft" because you're not depriving the owner of the ability to use it. That is a huge difference. Theft of service wouldn't exist if workers could simultaneously do unlimited number of side tasks.

    7. Re:How is this "theft?" by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 1

      According to Slashdot in every piracy article, this isn't "theft," because you're not taking anything physical. So I'm confused about the headline. Help me out, Slashdot.

      It's not about whether the thing is physical, it's about the difference between cp src dst and mv src dst .

    8. Re:How is this "theft?" by OverZealous.com · · Score: 1

      The argument with piracy isn't that your are "not taking anything physical", but that you are not taking a thing, period.

      If I "take" a copy of something from someone, but leave the original, that is copyright infringement. The owner still has the original item, therefore it isn't theft. However, they have lost the ability to control copies, therefore it is the very legitimate crime of copyright infringement.

      In this case, the original owner lost out on both the access to the domain, potential profit from the use of said domain, as well as the virtual asset of the ability to sell the rights to the domain. That is, very clearly, theft, since the original owner was deprived of the use of the domain.

      It is very important for us to be clear on our terminology, so that when we make arguments, the arguments are solid and understandable. When you confuse "theft" with "copyright infringement", all of the sudden taking a photograph of an item can be equated to taking that item. Which, I hope, is obviously different.

  35. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, if you really want to get technical, "I hate Hispanics" would be more along the lines of bigotry, not racism. If he would have followed up with "because Hispanics are inferior to Caucasians" then you would have a textbook racist statement. However, a stereotypical statement with the inference that one ethnic group is inferior to another could still be considered racism.

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  36. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    It's not racist, it's just -completely- off topic.

  37. Re:It's funny because it's true! by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    If this were 1940s Germany, the same people that are cops now would be concentration camp guards.

    Indeed. They are "only enforcing the laws" and "Don't like the laws? Cheang them... Blaw, blaw, blaw". No moral compass at all, they might as well be replaced with robots.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  38. Squatters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "victims" in this case are domain name investors with a portfolio of 800 names. Another thief vs. usurer case. Tryin' to work up some outrage here but can come up with only a vague distaste for everyone involved.

  39. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is interesting how people just assume ethnicity and other attributed personality traits buy lame association of some sound bits on people's last name. Goncalves, actually written Gonçalves, is a Portuguese name, therefore not Hispanic. Even if that was supposed to be joke it failed.

  40. how do you steal a domain name? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I run several domains, each purchased through a registrar. If someone hacked my godaddy account and changed all my NS records, wouldn't godaddy be able to restore my account as soon as I had proof of ownership (ie credit card statements)? Or are we talking about people who re-register recently expired domains? I am still not sure how one would steal a domain?

    1. Re:how do you steal a domain name? by kayditty · · Score: 0

      it is a pretty stupid system, but it's been done many times before. if you don't lock your domain and someone initiates a transfer request, you have to respond within a set perid or the domain defaults to them, or at least that's how it used to be. I actually know this guy (online) and we go back a long way; this is totally his M.O., and he would know this trick. don't ask me why it's set up that way, but it is.

      I recall this being used once by some other folks I know from around the same period ("shield" and the guys from some shell provider whose name I can't remember, which was basically part of the notorious FooNET or Creative Internet Techniques or whatever it was called--in the news here on Slashdot multiple times in the past) to "steal" the domain name Exodus.net, and after which they redirected the irc.exodus.net EFNet server to DALnet as some kind of humorous prank.

      look up "registrar-lcok" for more information.

    2. Re:how do you steal a domain name? by kayditty · · Score: 0

      to reply to myself, here's some more on the Exodus hijack (there are other sources available if you do a search for exodus domain hijack or something similar), which gives some mention of the flawed transfer process: http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3_401471

      you can easily find more if you dig around a bit.

    3. Re:how do you steal a domain name? by kayditty · · Score: 0

      I should add that it's not even necessary to make use of any kind of trick in this scenario being that he had access to the domain account @ godaddy.

  41. Searching for the Domain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Angel's told us that in their case they called their local law enforcement in Florida who sent a uniformed officer in a squad car to their home.

    Officer: We have a report of a stolen domain. I'm going to have to search your home to make sure if it's here or not.

  42. hmmm by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 1

    If the MP/RIAA can sue over theft of their intellectual property, why can't we? About damn time.

    --
    The game.
  43. criminal arrest for domain name theft by PPNSteve · · Score: 1

    Best story I've seen on /. in a while..
    As one who has quite a few domains myself, its nice to know there is even a slight chance of getting justice and the name back should some scumbag decide to hacksteal it.

    --
    PPN
  44. Biased modding and idiotic statements by painehope · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    From both sides. Every pro-gun or anti-police statement is modded down. Yet this kind of crap (about getting arrested for manslaughter for defending one's home) gets modded up. I can personally tell you in Texas, if they're on your property and you shoot them, you can tell the cops whatever you want. It's your property, so you're in the right. End of story. And I've seen both sides of it (had an acquaintance when I was a teenager killed by an irate father when he snuck up to a girl's window to visit her, and also have used lethal force to defend my own property).

    And yes, most cops are assholes. But even they can't make an unreasonable charge stick. So I stand with Mr. Buckshot. My 12-gauge combat shotgun lies within easy reach of my bed. Period.

    --
    PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
    1. Re:Biased modding and idiotic statements by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      had an acquaintance when I was a teenager killed by an irate father when he snuck up to a girl's window to visit her,

      And you find that okay? I'm not even going into the psychological damage that girl got when a friend (not even lover) got killed in front of her eyes.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    2. Re:Biased modding and idiotic statements by sumdumass · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      In Ohio, it similar but they have to be in the house and presenting a danger that makes you fear for you life of someone else' life. And yes, like you I have been on the dishing out side.

      A girl I used to run around with claimed she was raped by a guy she knew. I offered to let her stay with me for a while in the spare bedroom. I have several guns and was actually in the process of showing her how to load and unload a couple of them when someone kicked the door in and proceeded to strike her on the head with a baseball bat. He got one hit in that glanced down the left side of head and broke her collar bone before I shot and killed him. It probably would have been worse if it wasn't for the back of the couch interfering with his aim. He didn't even flinch when I yelled at him to stop and was unconcerned about my presence. He was intending to kill her plain and simple and the entire situation took place in less then 30 seconds. I barely had time to stand up before the first strike was made and he was yelling "I'm going to fucking kill you" as soon as his eyes met her.

    3. Re:Biased modding and idiotic statements by pnewhook · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      if they're on your property and you shoot them, you can tell the cops whatever you want.

      Well if you are the sort of person to lie to justify killing someone, then I hope you can sleep at night. Good luck in hell too.

      And yes, most cops are assholes.

      Well with that attitude. Gee I wonder why you get modded down a lot...

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    4. Re:Biased modding and idiotic statements by painehope · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Well, I didn't want to drag the rest of the story into it and make the off-topic post as complicated as the original scenario was, but the guy was (a) Black, (b) tripping on acid, and (c) stark naked. The girl was okay with him getting shot, because she was the girlfriend of a good friend of mine (my best friend actually, to the point where we call each other "brother by a different mother") and he'd already beat the fuck out of the guy for hitting on his girl. While the Black guy had been a friend of hers (and my brother as well), that had ended when he started hitting on her. As a White man, if I found a Black teenager naked outside my daughter's window in the wee hours, I'd blow his ass away too (I'd do the same for am unknown, naked White guy as well, but being of a different race only compounds the idiocy of his actions...I know the politically correct and socially/scientifically ignorant crowd can't accept this, but for many reasons - especially genetic and social ones - I do not condone miscegenation; before everyone starts screaming "racist!", I have friends and colleagues of all races, but they share my opinion of interracial "romance" - it leads to nothing but problems, often violent or fatal ones...recent example : http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2539094/Model-Amy-Leigh-Barnes-chilling-999-call.html). Besides, this wasn't even romance. She didn't want him there, and he had the misfortune of waking her father. Though it might be a good thing, considering the fact that no one really knew whether his intentions were just to visit her or if they were more sinister than just being wasted and annoying.

      I felt somewhat bad for the guy, because I don't think he meant any real harm and it's been my experience that Black people don't do well on acid (every single Black person I've ever known that took acid wigged out and dig dumb shit to one degree or another on LSD-25). But what he did was very stupid (not to mention creepy), high or not, and he paid the price for it. I didn't shed any tears (about a year later) for some guys that my brother and I sold acid to that tried to rob a Burger King while tripping and ended up a in a shoot-out with the law that killed several of them, either, so why would I have a problem with it?

      Do stupid things and pay the price for the it. Pretty simple concept.

      --
      PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
    5. Re:Biased modding and idiotic statements by painehope · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hey, dickhead, way to jump to conclusions! I did not say anything about lying. I actually meant how much or how little you choose to disclose (though I did not make that as clear as I should have, so a little turd like you can misconstrue it however you want). In one event where I used lethal force to defend myself and my ex-wife on my property, I merely told the police that the guy threatened us, started to physically assault me (by grabbing me, but I didn't say that detail as it was irrelevant as to how he put his hands on me), and I took appropriate measures to defend myself and my wife (without going into any details whatsoever, as that's where the DA gets their justification to hang your ass). Anything else they wanted to discuss they could do so with my lawyer. That's the smartest route in any case where you are dealing with the police, no matter what's going on. Say nothing, or as little as possible, and let your lawyer handle the rest. Because in this incident they did attempt to prosecute me (interestingly enough, not until 6 months or so down the road when the FBI was trying to put pressure on me to pursue a racketeering - RICO act - case against some friends and possibly myself as well). The grand jury threw the case out after reviewing the scanty evidence, but I didn't hear one word back from the police until they later had a use for the incident.

      If I'm on my own property and shoot someone, I don't need to lie about it. If someone even so much as threatens you or trespasses on your property, you are justified in killing them (just make sure you do kill them, so they don't try to sue you later on, as some people have found out). And, for the record, I have never killed anyone unless it was (a) in a combat situation, (b) self-defense, or (c) defending or avenging a friend or family member. I try to live as peacefully as possible in a not-so-peaceful world, but I also don't take shit from people that mistake kindness for weakness. So I don't think I'll be burning in hell for that. And I don't have any problems sleeping over those things either, thanks for asking!

      And I generally don't get modded down for most of my comments (technical or not). I was making the point about the other comments getting modded down in a pattern that indicated a bias based upon personal opinions rather than the actual content of the posts. As for my attitude towards police, it's based entirely upon my personal experience and observations. If you'll look up the history of my comments in a recent /. argument about police, their mentality, and my experiences with their incompetence, arrogance, cruelty, unwarranted aggression, and flagrant violation of simple, common-sense human rights and the laws they are supposed to be upholding), you'll note that none of my posts were modded down and some were modded up.

      And to comment on the actual story here, what I see is a case of two parties that aren't really using the DNS system as it's intended (a cracker stealing from a squatter...the guilty party has technical knowledge, at least to some degree, whereas the victim has no technical abilities and is merely taking advantage of "business trends" - I don't think this is what the spirit of the Internet is about, even if the framework and laws allow it). One party (the accuser) buys domain names that he does not use in hopes of making money off selling them to people who actually would use them down the road. Not exactly a technology pioneer. The other guy takes advantage of the lack of technical savvy of this other parasite (an AOL user putting himself forth as a networking businessman...laughable) and steals his domain. Not justified, but definitely ironic. I say put them in a room, let them go after each other with crowbars, and then shoot whoever walks out alive. The world will be a better place.

      --
      PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
    6. Re:Biased modding and idiotic statements by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      You are everything thats wrong with society today. No wonder Texas is the laughing stock of America. Good luck in hell shithead.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    7. Re:Biased modding and idiotic statements by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      I just want to say that there is a big difference in statement between "a teenager sneaking to his daughters room" than a "a naked teenager high on acid and potentially dangerous sneaking to his daughters room"

      The first one definitely implies that it's harmless (what teenager didn't sneak to the room of his teenage-love?). Being shot in that context is a world of a difference than being shot in the case what you described. Your original post, however, implied the harmless version.

      Oh, and just for the record. The guy being black was totally irrelevant and you could have left it out. The fact that you didn't leave it out tells a lot more about you than you think. (Including even the typical "I have friends of all races", how cliché )

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    8. Re:Biased modding and idiotic statements by painehope · · Score: 1

      I suppose it does change the story a bit, but not much. Most people have a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality about intruders on their property at night. I've almost been shot when I was younger by my own family for trying to come in through a window after I'd lost my keys.

      As for the racial bit, it's a proven fact that Blacks commit crimes at a much higher rate than any other race in the US, especially against White females. So it's entirely relevant in the context. As for my commentary about interracial relationships, there's a big difference between friendship and respect, and diluting one's bloodline. My Black friends understand that, and wouldn't date a White woman. And they respect the fact that I am neither attracted to nor would I date anyone but a White woman. So on and so forth for other races. Simply because one has pride in one's heritage does not preclude respect for others.

      --
      PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
    9. Re:Biased modding and idiotic statements by painehope · · Score: 1

      I am everything that's wrong with society today? A working, tax-paying citizen who happens to disagree with you? Who points out that morons like you and your ilk are being consistently modded up or not modded, while dissenting voices are modded down?

      Yep, I'm the cause of unemployment, corrupt and bloated government, human rights abuses, a pointless war in Iraq, millions of illegal immigrants sponging off an already flawed system, and a host of other problems that I could go on about all day. Okay, following that logic, if I'm the cause of all those problems, I'll fix them. ASAP. Of course, you might not like the way that I solve them, but you've now given the responsibility over to me. Thanks, I've been wanting to do something for a while now.

      Seriously, you are a venomous moron. And Texas is the laughing stock of the U.S.? Get real. Bush is not from Texas, for one. Texas has some of the largest non-government technical industries in the country (think petroleum and medical). I believe the butt of most jokes about a particular state are either West Virginia or California. Hell, California can't even pay their welfare recipients, yet they're passing video game legislation.

      And I'm going to hell, as you have emphatically stated twice now. That one's going to keep me up at nights. Are you one of those guys or gals that stands around outside concerts and passes out literature about how listening to Marilyn Manson or whomever is going to send us straight to hell? What is it with you and hell? As a Christian, I personally find people that run around telling whomever they don't agree with that they're "going to hell" or "good luck in hell shithead" pretty goddamn offensive. I think God has better things to do than send people to hell for defending their property or having a certain opinion or musical taste.

      --
      PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
  45. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF does "in and amongst itself" mean?

  46. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Roxton · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Asking a question about the ethnicity of a name does not automatically make one a racist.

    +5 Insightful? What the hell?
    Raising questions of ethnicity that would be irrelevant to anything but a racist sentiment is, in fact, racist. Take your rules-lawyer morality and shove it up your ass.

  47. Worked with this guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting... I worked with this guy up until a few months ago. Always seemed like a nice kid.

    Figured the house and the Lotus were due to coming from a well off family. As well as when he recently bought someone's hosting business for $70k or so in cash.

    Guess you never know what people are really up to outside of work.

    1. Re:Worked with this guy by kayditty · · Score: 0

      they are. I know him from way back on EFNet. I'm pretty sure he and his family is utterly loaded. I haven't talked to him in a few years; he was only sporting multiple BMWs back then, but yeah. I think his aunt and some of the rest of his family are big into law--he's from New Jersey (well, by way of Portugal), for crying out loud. but that guy used to ask me to help him "hack" things so much back then; we used to do some nefarious things on the intertubes.. this is totally what he likes to do. I doubt he's really into harming anyone, and I don't think he cares about the money. sometimes it's just fun.

      I don't know.

  48. Sorry brief rant -- 'loser pays' is a terrible ide by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

    Having a policy like loser pays legal bills of both sides would go a long way to making the court system fair. Right now its often richest guy wins because he can outlast the poor guy.

    The richest would still win because they could still outlast the poor guy because they would still be paying out the arse for the best lawyers around while the poor guy couldn't afford to. The whole point of "loser pays" is that you only get paid if you win, and thus only makes the situation you're talking about worse. Because ask any lawyer -- no matter how much of a slam-dunk you think your case is, there's always the chance that you will lose in court.

    Right now poor people cave in to the rich because they cannot afford the cost of a lawyer, even a cheap one. The odds of them winning and the reward for winning are not great enough to justify that expense. If they thought they'd certainly win and get enough out of winning, they'd stay the course even in the current system.

    Now imagine that the poor person had to pay the rich guy's legal bills! Exactly how sure of your case would you have to be to risk having to pay millions of dollars in legal fees if you lose, when hiring your own el-cheapo lawyer for a few g's is already an onerous expense? Nobody would dare fight the rich in court! Even with obvious modifications, like limiting the expense to at most what you yourself spent, that means doubling the cost, again an onerous situation and completely defeating the purpose when the whole premise is that people can't afford to fight legal battles!

    Whereas this does nothing to discourage the rich from using their dollars to sway justice in their favor. What, like the rich would care that they have to spend a little extra paying the poor guy's rinky dink lawyer after spending ridiculous sums on their own lawyers?

    "Loser pays" solves nothing. It was an idea created by those who benefit from the current system and wanted to make it even more lopsided, sold as a reform to help make the courts "fair." It's anything but.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  49. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

    I never understood the relevance of the cedilha. Doesn't it basically make the "s" sound? Seems kinda redundant to me. There might be a nuance that I am not picking up on, but I live in a Brazilian/Portuguese neighborhood and I've yet to get a good explanation.

  50. Imaginary property... by mi · · Score: 1

    Aren't domain names imaginary property? Certainly can't touch them. Somebody thinks of them first and boom, he gets to control it for eternity — not even for 75 years (or whatever the hated music copyright lasts nowadays)... So, why don't we see objections to the use of the term "theft" in this discussion?

    Is it because many more slashdotters own domain-names, which they dread losing, than those, who have written a song worth copying?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Imaginary property... by plnix0 · · Score: 1

      Domain name theft is an impossibility. People should stop using terms that confuse and twist language and call things what they are. Even if respecting others claims to domain name usage were a moral imperative (that's a separate issue which I'm choosing not to address), the notion that it is 'theft' should be patently absurd to anyone who hasn't abdicated his brain. Defending of domain-name "rights" should at least be able to argue their case without resorting to abusing the concept of property.

  51. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by ptrace · · Score: 1

    Goncalves is Portuguese, which is technically not "Hispanic". Many ignorantly group it as such, but all Federal employment forms I've encountered track is as European extraction. So what's your point?

  52. Re:Sorry brief rant -- 'loser pays' is a terrible by pnewhook · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Loser pays" solves nothing. It was an idea created by those who benefit from the current system and wanted to make it even more lopsided, sold as a reform to help make the courts "fair." It's anything but.

    I disagree

    If I was poor and had to pay legal bills to a lawyer upfront, I'd probably not even try even if I knew I was right as either I couldn't afford a good lawyer or maybe if I was lucky an inexperienced one.

    If I knew I was right and the loser pays, I'd get a good laywer and the playing field is now even.

    --
    Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
  53. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Meneguzzi · · Score: 1

    A single S in Portuguese implies a Z sound, depending on the presence of vowels and consonants around it (for example, S always has a Z sound when between vowels). Cedilla always has the S sound regardless of the surrounding letters. It is somewhat redundant, I will give you that, but in terms of strict necessity, it is similar to the case of C and K in English, you could do without C in English by using S and K depending on the circumstance. But I bet it is still being used out of some arcane inheritance from French or German or something.

    --
    www.meneguzzi.eu/felipe
  54. MOD PARENT UP.. WAY UP by FlyingGuy · · Score: 1

    domain names want to be free!!!

    --
    Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
  55. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by kayditty · · Score: 0

    as others have mentioned, it's portuguese in origing. he is from Portugal, though, not Brazil. and he's like 5'3" (yes, I totally know him!!!eleventy). aha. I hope he reads this.

  56. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Goncalves (*) is a Portuguese or Brasilian surname. (*) the "c" should be a "c with cedilha" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedilla [wikipedia.org] ) And your question was racist. What difference does it make the racial background of the accused.

    You've never seen an odd name and wondered what its ethnic/national background was? Go rot, kneejerker.

  57. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +5 Insightful? What the hell?
    Raising questions of ethnicity that would be irrelevant to anything but a racist sentiment is, in fact, racist. Take your rules-lawyer morality and shove it up your ass.

    He saw a strange name and was curious. Pull your head out of your own.

  58. Domain theft should be a criminal matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a sad case I know of, that happened to a friend. TV producer Gerard Ange learned the hard way that law enforcement and the courts don't care about domain name theft. His business website was named after his California company, GAP International. Another GAP International, of Pennsylvania, paid off the owner of the hosting company Gerard used, through which he maintained the domain name, and took over the account and name for their own use. The host owner then fled the country to Germany. Gerard immediatety lost access to his site and his email, which lost him a $50 million deal and led to his being wiped out and his life ruined. He has been unable to get justice in the courts and in the end got stuck with a crooked judge who possibly was paid off by GAP, which has plenty of money and connections to perform illegalities like this. Now Ange's life has been destroyed and the thieves are free. Cases like this show domain theft should be a criminal and not just a civil matter, and better supported by law enforcement than it is.

  59. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by darthvader100 · · Score: 1

    I wish i had some mod points to mod this funny

  60. Domain Registry of America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well DROA is a reseller for Enom Inc, not that DROA are fraudulent in anyway.

    I have some letters here letting me know my domains are expiring... I had better send them a check quick before they expire or get transfered!

  61. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by PixetaledPikachu · · Score: 1

    He saw a strange name and was curious. Pull your head out of your own.

    Then he should have asked for whether the name "Goncalves" is a hispanic or other. He was asking about Goncalves' ethnic background

  62. Cohen can explain this, and you can verify it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cohen is a jew so have him explain this something below and you can verify it yourself from their talmud:

    http://groups.google.com/group/soc.men/browse_thread/thread/2385ab653d66252/6cc421202f854b7b

    1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim (Gentiles) is like killing a wild
    animal."

    2. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be
    violated."

    3. Yebamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted
    if she is three years of age."

    4. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."

    5. Yebamoth 98a: "All gentile children are animals."

    The above is compounded moreso by Bernie Madoff and the ponzi schemes in the hedgefund scandals and you can top that off w/ the Jew Rabbis in New Jersey being caught laundering monies this week too here http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=agHjKddhC2TE and in case you don't know it, if you are a non-jew you are considered a "goyim" or "gentile" by them and that makes you nothing more than cattle and animals to them per their own talmud. Something to consider.

    1. Re:Cohen can explain this, and you can verify it by dhermann · · Score: 1

      Something to consider.

      Uhhhh... no. Not something I will be considering.

  63. fags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, cops are stupid. All the 'worker bees' are stupid, that's why they don't work with teh hi-tech like us l33ts. God, I hate them. And I LOVE us! We're the best and brightest!
    You know, Mensa had a good idea a while back. We should select the cops, firemen, laborers etc out of the gene pool. Can you imagine???!!111!!

  64. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by ZorinLynx · · Score: 1

    Stop being so overly sensitive. You and excessive political correctness are destroying the ability to just ASK NORMAL QUESTIONS without offending someone.

    Bunch of crybabies.

  65. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So if I meet someone and they tell me their name, and I ask about their ethnic background, that makes me a racist? Boy am I glad I don't live in the same messed up world you do.

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  66. Why's that? Worried about your kid now?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Uhhhh... no. Not something I will be considering."

    Per the subject above and the post you replied to, are you yourself a jew who is now trying to bury this exchange we are having, or, are you busy worrying about your kids now too, since apparently the jews think per their own talmud that raping 3 year old little girls of non-jew faith or ancestry is 'ok to do'? That it's ok for the jews to call us nothing more than animals and it is 'ok to kill non-jews'?? No small wonder Hitler did as he did. The man was a hero as far as I am concerned because of that jews own words in their talmud about the rest of us non-jews. Now, did you also know that jews were asked/told 6 months beforehand to leave germany and many instead got uppity and decided not to leave when asked to do so in germany and figured their gold (their true god) was going to protect them. Guess they found out what is what on that account. Germany is not the US. The germans had every right to oust them. They would not leave so, small wonder that happened to them. Now nobody wants them around, and the palestinians being kicked out of their lands after ww2 proves that much, that nobody wanted jews around at all. They had all had enough of them and their thievery (which Bernie Madoff and the Secaucus New Jersey rabbis being busted for laundering and ripping off others only further shows us all a glimpse of their nature that every other nation on the planet is clearly aware of, since they did not want them around). They have successfully invaded this nation and taken over communications, legal arenas, politics, financial, and other power bases without firing a shot but oddly doing what any invading conqueror does (especially seizing communications and media, which controls the masses more than 1 would think) and the publishing houses. Then, they rewrite history to suit them but strangely, for all of their "pity us jews" b.s., no one is ever told they were asked to leave nazi germany. All we ever hear is how they were put into ovens. You don't leave my home, I would do the same, shoot first, ask questions later. Period. They come into other nations and now hide by their control of the medical realm and circumsize non jews so they cannot be spotted as they were in nazi germany and other european countries. Personally I think the jews are at the root of all the world's problems, and nothing else shows me any different. Most of all, when I began looking into this, because I wondered why they were so despised? When I ran into their own beliefs about the rest of us "cattle" (goyim/gentiles) and how it was ok to rape our little girls and kill us? Fuck that. They might wonder why they are despised, but a look at their own talmud does it all for me on that note. They are thieves and even their own relatives the arabic people consider them that and its part of why they have this ages old feud going (yes, they are related, even though judaism is more a faith than a race per se but iirc, 1 of them big time jews in antiquity had 2 sons, 1 by a concubine and the other by his rightful wife. The jew one somehow screwed the arab guy over real bad and this led to this allegedly). Yes, even their own family seems to outright truly hate them. That tells me tons in and of itself. Why the hell we fight their battles for them overseas (face it the jews w/out U.S. tech & muscle behind them would be crushed by the arabs eventually, and the 6 days war was the USA winning it, not the jews) boggles my mind, but when a single religious/ethnic body controls 90% of a nation's wealth roughly as jews now do goes a long ways to political arm twisting and coercion it seems. I don't want to hate anybody, but based on the writings I put up from their own talmud, I am starting to dislike them very much (putting that lightly). I say that, because I know that it comes down to individuals, but jews act as a collective and in a bad way, all through history. Personally, I don't think it's "all jews are evil" but rather their leadership via their synagogues & shul a

  67. Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    Is making out OK too? ^^

    (No men please! ;)

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.