Slashdot Mirror
Woman With Police-Monitoring Blog Arrested
Kris Thalamus writes "The Washington Post reports that a Virginia woman is being held in custody by police who allege that information she posted on her blog puts members of the Jefferson area drug enforcement task force at risk. 'In a nearly year-long barrage of blog posts, she published snapshots she took in public of many or most of the task force's officers; detailed their comings and goings by following them in her car; mused about their habits and looks; hinted that she may have had a personal relationship with one of them; and, in one instance, reported that she had tipped off a local newspaper about their movements. Predictably, this annoyed law enforcement officials, who, it's fair to guess, comprised much of her readership before her arrest. But what seems to have sent them over the edge — and skewed their judgment — is Ms. Strom's decision to post the name and address of one of the officers with a street-view photo of his house. All this information was publicly available, including the photograph, which Ms. Strom gleaned from municipal records.'"
I see a lot of the posts here as being the classic one sided view. End up with drug dealers on your street harassing your right to a safe community who will you call? You'll call the police. But of course most people want some magical force to come protect them but get upset when certain additional rights are required by that force to do its job properly. A police officer's family is just as vulnerable as yours and in my opinion that information should be protected. We unfortunately don't have laws in this country to affect irresponsible but legal activities so this situation provides a catch 22.
Yes, I know all the 'freedom of speech' people will outcry on this but in reality that is in some ways a imperfect idea. Yes freedom of speech is highly important in a free society, however there are limits to it if you wish to also have a stable community. These officers choose to do this job and deal daily with all the crap the rest of us like to pretend doesn't exist. They do this as a career choice, no one made them. In a case like this I have no problems cutting them some slack to protect their and their family's safety interests. If this means letting them find some law to use to stop a wack-job jeopardizing their safety and ability to do their job efficiently, so be it. It's an imperfect world. It would be FAR more imperfect if you didn't have someone to police the rules.
Play me online? Well you know that I'll beat you. If I ever meet you I'll "/sbin/shutdown -h now" you. -Weird Al, kinda.
I think she did right.
I could not disagree with you more if I tried.
Police officers, on a daily basis, deal with dangerous threats to their lives. Members of the drug enforcement task force, even more so. Significantly more so. They do this knowingly and willingly and they should be respected for the dangerous jobs they do.
The actions of this woman have put the lives of these officers at risk. More so, and the reason I am glad she's been arrested and I hope she is convicted, is that she has also put the lives of the officers' families at risk as well - the wives (or husbands) and children of these officers. Anyone who attempts to justify putting the lives of spouses and children at risk as acceptable is daft, pure and simple.
Lest people forget, drug dealers can often be violent and vindictive. This woman has made it very easy for these drug dealers to directly target the officers families, putting their lives at risk.
It would be really nice if people remembered that the officers have a right to privacy (if we demand it for ourselves, then we should demand it for them as well) and, more importantly, their FAMILIES have a right to safety and privacy. People who willingly and knowingly put the lives of other citizens at risk should be stopped.
I'm glad she got arrested and I hope she serves a significant period of time for her actions.
Here's a secret - we're not talking about generic children. We can probably visit this woman's site and, in short order, have the names (if not pictures) of the specific children we're talking about. We're not talking about "the children" - we're talking about "their children." One is a blanket statement meant to neuter the other side of an argument because who would argue against something like that while the other is a reference to very specific people who just happen to be children and thus, when referring to them, one must call them "children." Huge difference.
Actually you can even request a ride along from the police if you want. They're supposed to be open about what they do. Except the undercovers. Since the drug laws violate people's freedom for no good reason why do we not hold these people accountable for their actions. The drug war isn't really over until the war crimes on both sides are answered for. Remember how many people the Regan government arrested for possessing drugs the government had originally sold? Unfair laws and the people who enforce them to not deserve any respect. I'm just following orders hasn't been a valid excuse since Nuremberg.
Now you have something in common with Adolf Hitler. You just took a group of people and set them apart as a different species.
Makes it easier to have such hate-filled emotions and a desire to kill them doesn't?
After reading your other post, I think you are a bigger danger to this country than the entire DEA. You sound like your ready to kill at a moment's notice, or at the very least, support the idea of violence to solve our problems.