Lying while performing official duties often IS illegal. Thats the distinction. Cops can lie all they want when they are off-duty, but on-duty, they are not longer individuals, but an arm of the State. The State should never be allowed to lie.
In an Information Age, like the one we are currently in, casual typed conversation DOES NOT have to adhere to strict grammar. Those rules were made for when comms were hard and expensive and the effects long lasting.
The thing is, not everyone wants to keep all that information on their pocket computer that gets rifled through by every app you put on it. I'll keep printing out my boarding passes and using cash, thank you very much.
Dude, its a car, not a magical carriage. Any qualified and competent mechanic could fix one. Also, BY LAW, there is no such thing as an 'unauthorized dealer' for repairs. All certified mechanics are 'authorized' to repair any car without affecting the warranty of the car.
I will never understand this argument. Citizens are not bound like police are. I enjoy liberties the police never can. My liberty should ALWAYS exceed the police's.
Cops should NEVER be allowed to lie outside of specific, warrant backed undercover operations. I will never understand when it became ok for those charged with enforcing the law to lie without shame.
No it shouldnt. Any redaction process allows for footage to be altered. There should be no redaction at all. Its more important to stop police abuse than it is to protect privacy in this case.
I disagree. I think the cams should be showing raw footage at all times. Allowing ANY redaction opens the door for abuse. You call the police, you get filmed, that is how its going to be in the 21st Century.
The police are far more constrained in their use of resources like this. They dont get to use the plain sight defense when doing longterm surveillance like this. The wrong here is the use of police resources to surveil a person long-term without talking to a judge about it.
If they assigned a patrol car to just sit on his house without a warrant, that would be a problem too. Its not the specific action, its the scope that makes it wrong.
NO ITS NOT. Holy shit. Part of the reason my sovereign exists is to protect MY interests, which includes protecting the labor market. ALL MARKETS HAVE REGULATIONS, there is no such thing as a free market.
Where i grew up, everything was laid out in a grid, so cutting through a neighborhood was normal and no big deal. Now I live in CA, and EVERY neighborhood is designed to prevent that with curves and limited ins/outs. Very infuriating.
They keep strapping more power to it, but the feature set doesnt really increase. Sure you can have more shiny, but you cant do anything general purpose at all. They dont even allow regular bluetooth controllers on the thing, Apple approved only. Who CARES how much power they keep putting into it if it cant really be used?
This is the same bullshit argument used when we talk about reducing copyright. Some argue we CANT reduce copyright because of the monetary value of those rights and the government would have to compensate all IP holders for the loss of value. I find this argument to be ludicrous at best.
Slashdot Mirror
"But how is the police going to stop crime otherwise?" Your logic is flawed. Saying the police HAVE to lie to solve crimes is pants-on-head retarded.
They are operating as an ARM OF THE STATE. When they wear that badge they are not individuals, but State actors.
Lying while performing official duties often IS illegal. Thats the distinction. Cops can lie all they want when they are off-duty, but on-duty, they are not longer individuals, but an arm of the State. The State should never be allowed to lie.
In an Information Age, like the one we are currently in, casual typed conversation DOES NOT have to adhere to strict grammar. Those rules were made for when comms were hard and expensive and the effects long lasting.
This is only the beginning.
The thing is, not everyone wants to keep all that information on their pocket computer that gets rifled through by every app you put on it. I'll keep printing out my boarding passes and using cash, thank you very much.
Dude, its a car, not a magical carriage. Any qualified and competent mechanic could fix one. Also, BY LAW, there is no such thing as an 'unauthorized dealer' for repairs. All certified mechanics are 'authorized' to repair any car without affecting the warranty of the car.
Almost all ISPs have this ability. Hijacking plain HTTP is no big deal. You are doing critical account stuff over HTTPS, right?
People took guns on planes for DECADES without incident. It wasnt until some jackasses with box cutters that guns were banned.
I will never understand this argument. Citizens are not bound like police are. I enjoy liberties the police never can. My liberty should ALWAYS exceed the police's.
Cops should NEVER be allowed to lie outside of specific, warrant backed undercover operations. I will never understand when it became ok for those charged with enforcing the law to lie without shame.
No it shouldnt. Any redaction process allows for footage to be altered. There should be no redaction at all. Its more important to stop police abuse than it is to protect privacy in this case.
I disagree. I think the cams should be showing raw footage at all times. Allowing ANY redaction opens the door for abuse. You call the police, you get filmed, that is how its going to be in the 21st Century.
Its the length of time they went about it. 4 months is too long without talking to a judge.
The police are far more constrained in their use of resources like this. They dont get to use the plain sight defense when doing longterm surveillance like this. The wrong here is the use of police resources to surveil a person long-term without talking to a judge about it.
If they assigned a patrol car to just sit on his house without a warrant, that would be a problem too. Its not the specific action, its the scope that makes it wrong.
That time has LONG since passed. Its foolish romanticism.
NO ITS NOT. Holy shit. Part of the reason my sovereign exists is to protect MY interests, which includes protecting the labor market. ALL MARKETS HAVE REGULATIONS, there is no such thing as a free market.
At what point do we have the right as a sovereign to say 'no more, we are full?' When is the cut off to you?
You can only swing the Hammer of the State so hard before you become the monster. Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Where i grew up, everything was laid out in a grid, so cutting through a neighborhood was normal and no big deal. Now I live in CA, and EVERY neighborhood is designed to prevent that with curves and limited ins/outs. Very infuriating.
They keep strapping more power to it, but the feature set doesnt really increase. Sure you can have more shiny, but you cant do anything general purpose at all. They dont even allow regular bluetooth controllers on the thing, Apple approved only. Who CARES how much power they keep putting into it if it cant really be used?
If the right can be given without compensation, it can be taken away without compensation.
This is the same bullshit argument used when we talk about reducing copyright. Some argue we CANT reduce copyright because of the monetary value of those rights and the government would have to compensate all IP holders for the loss of value. I find this argument to be ludicrous at best.
ON windows i use MCEbuddy to automatically convert .wtv to .mp4.