You're presuming the government representative will be friendly in return. They might but there are countless examples of them being anything but friendly.
In my experience, most professions in the government are quite friendly. I have worked with the FAA, the DEA, and had brief encounters with the FBI, all of whom were very pleasant.
To which they would likely respond by putting you in a jail cell until such time as you were able to consult your lawyer and then proceed with the search with or without your help. Probably would charge you with obstruction of justice at a minimum.
I suspect we are talking about two different things.
First, if they simply want to bust in and conduct a search via force, they don't need a NSL to do it, they have guns and can be thugs any time they want.
Second, when the FBI visits your office because they want information about a customer, they don't come in with a dozen agents with guns, two men in suits come in and hand your their business card and say, "we would like to ask you a few questions about a customer of yours that we have concerns about".
At which point I say, "why don't you come into my office and we can talk".
When they come in, they say, "we understand you have been flying customer XYZ, we would like to know where he is going, who he is flying with, and what they are doing when they get there."
To which I reply, "I would be happy to help you, however due to privacy rules, I cannot release customer information without a court order. If you have a warrant from a court of law for this information, I would be happy to comply".
They come back the next morning with such an order, I provide the information, everyone is happy.
Exactly... I'm giving them a clear and fairly easy path to a yes that also happens to comply with the law...
I'm not under any illusions of being some tough guy who can just laugh and say "no, and you can't make me". That would be stupid, and the easy way or the hard way, if they really want to make me, they can.
What was considered harmless 50 years ago is now considered quite toxic...
So... the government is right now and can't make any mistakes, right? RIGHT?
---
Yes, lets go inject EVERYONE with stuff and I'm sure we'll NEVER find a reason EVER to decide maybe it wasn't a good idea...
I of course don't know if that is the case, but I think we should be a WHOLE LOT MORE SURE before we do it. This is the whole human race we're talking about after all...
"Observe adult role models outside the family." That I got to do, and lost all respect for authority. Of course reading history books contributed. Hint, if you want a well adjusted kid don't have him do a report on the Holocaust after reading two or three histories on it and meeting a survivor like I did at age 8.
When I was 10 years old, my parents took me to Europe, including to the Netherlands where I got to go see Anne Frank's house...
I've seen the remains of the camps, what the Nazis did is evil... it is sad that so many people around the world don't really understand how pure evil people in government can do such things, but they can and have...
The FBI would likely explain that the secret judge had already secretly signed a secret warrant in the secret court, sorry we can't show you but pinky swear it exists. That's the sort of rule of law we have these days, sadly.
To which I would, very politely reply, "that might be true, I'm not a lawyer and honestly don't know. I'll have to consult with my lawyer and get back to you. Rest assured it is my intention to comply with the law, but I need to know what the law is first and my lawyer is the professional who advises me of that"
I would also politely suggest that if they would like a quicker response, bring me a normal warrant signed by a judge and they'll get instant service.
---
I fully understand the attitude of many police officers and federal agents, they think walking into a business and flashing their badge gets them access, and often it probably does. Some people probably comply out of a sense of being a patriot, or just to get them out of their office.
On the other hand, I don't hand out business information to anyone who just walks into the door, at least not without a court order.
---
May I say... the whole idea of dealing with anyone from the government, be police or FBI, is to show respect for their position and for the law, I find that goes a long way towards having friendly conversations. There is no room for "tough guy" talk, they'll win that one...
Are you sure? For the most part, in many countries today, it no longer is (because such laws are silly anyway), but for most of history, it has been VERY illegal.
And is it really okay to allow somebody not to go to the doctor if it's in the interest of public health, so they don't spread diseases on to others? No?
Yes, it is...
Now if someone is actually sick, as in infected right this second, with... lets say... Ebola... then yes, it makes sense that you have to prevent them from walking around a shopping mall. I highly doubt you'll find ANYONE who thinks that is ok.
But people without vaccines are not infected...
How about in an extreme example where a kid has ebola? Should parents be allowed to refuse medical treatment, and continue to expose the kid to other kids?
No, medial confinement in the case of an ACTUAL infection is reasonable, everyone agrees with that (even the anti-doctor religions do)
Can parents refuse medical treatment for their kids? Depends on the age... If the kid is 17? I say the kid can do what he/she wants. 7? Yes... What age is the cutoff? That is another topic...
Parent refuse vaccines, their kids can get sick and infect others who had no choice in the matter.
It is the parent's right to raise the child as he/she sees fit. The more you step on that, the worse it gets. You might be happy with this specific issue, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
No matter how moral or just your cause is, doing wrong is never right.
Being polite and considerate goes a long way when dealing with men in suits from the government. When you show that you're a law abiding citizen who is happy to comply with the law, that helps too.
Simply informing them that you're happy to comply when presented a warrant from a judge gives them a clear path to get what they want.
Anything else? Never heard of it, will have to discuss with my lawyer.
The warrant can be obtained in less than 24 hours, the other path takes longer.
But go ahead and think whatever you want...:)
---
Side note, regarding the FBI agents with guns. While they do generally carry guns, they don't normally make arrests themselves, they would bring the police, or if a more serious situation, agents with body armor and better gear.
Two men in suits standing in your office having a pleasant conversation with a friendly person are not going to whip out guns. If they actually did say, "we have to place you under arrest", my reply would be, "sure, please call the local police and have them come do it, you're two guys in suits with business cards, I'm not going anywhere with you without local law enforcement present.
It is no different than if someone who claims to be an undercover cop tries to stop you. You simple call the police, or ask them to bring out a uniformed officer. Criminals don't do that, so that is a reasonable request within your rights.
Yes they do, and if they came in guns drawn, I of course would offer no resistance.
I would then call my lawyer. They would have to charge me with something in front of a judge, at which point they are going to have a hard time explaining why I'm there since I didn't actually do anything.
Now if the judge wants to issue a warrant for the information the FBI is asking for, then of course I would comply. The judge can also order me to not reveal anything about the case for security reasons, and I can respect that too. The key part is the judge is doing the ordering, not the FBI.
My issue is with the FBI just deciding they can ask for anything they want without a warrant.
While I don't care to get into details for obvious reasons, I can tell you that they can be compelled to get a warrant. All I'll say is that I've been served before, I've had the FBI standing in my office and I complied because there was a warrant issued by a judge.
And that is how it is supposed to happen.
---
Side note, while it is true the FBI can charge you with a crime for ignoring a NSL, that charge isn't secret... let me just say that when told politely that you'll comply with a warrant, they can get one pretty quickly (less than 24 hours in the above case) so it really isn't asking that much of them.
I'm well aware that most large companies just comply, they don't care... I do, I consider NSLs to be unconstitutional, get a judge to issue a warrant and I'll be willing to comply.
What is to stop someone from saying that their religion requires their children to carry and scatter peanuts everywhere they go? Should children of this religion be allowed in public schools even though their presence may, and probably will, kill other students?
That is taking an active approach to spreading a problem.
If a child actually had the measles, it would be reasonable to not allow them into school until they were healthy again.
My child doesn't have measles, so explain to me why you don't want them in school?
Vaccinations shouldn't be mandatory, however, they only work if the group as a whole is vaccinated. How do you propose we solve this paradox?
My biggest issue is that we're injecting everyone with stuff that hasn't been subject to the same sets of standards as normal medication and because it is immune to lawsuits, isn't being challenged the way normal medication can be.
We should have much stricter checks and studies on vaccines than we do other medication, instead we have less.
I actually believe in the concept of vaccines. What I don't trust is the current way they are made and the lack of proper testing and studies.
Formaldehyde and Mercury are still in some of them, and many of them were developed many years ago, the long term risks of injecting everyone with these is really not known (20 years is not long term, 200 years is getting there, longer still is really long term).
Anything that we as a people decide should be injected into every man, woman, and child, should be subject to the greatest degree of study and evaluation possible, or you risk causing a long term problem greater than the original disease.
---
I am not a medical expert, but I am wise enough to know that you shouldn't gamble with the future of human evolution without making really sure that your solution isn't worse than the problem you're trying to solve.
Not enough time has passed to really know the long term outcome.
My religion is my business... not yours or the governments... that is the whole point of freedom of religion...
The minute you start deciding what is a "real" religion, you've just gotten yourself into the religion business, and that is completely against the constitution.
Um... no. You do not have the right to put those around you at risk. If you don't vaccinate your children, they shouldn't be allowed to go to public school, period.
Ahh, logic, such a nice concept that fails to work on so many people.
So, what about the mall? The movie theater? You think your kids don't go there? You think vaccinated kids don't go there?
The whole public school thing is just another measure of control, a way for the Federal Government to try and stick its nose into more states rights using money.
So you're all hung up on schools... why? You somehow think that protects your kids?
If you don't understand why there's a program to compensate people who have negative reactions to vaccines, you shouldn't talk about it.... it makes you look stupid.
The government giving me money because my child was harmed by a drug they were forced to take does not repair my child.
Just to be clear though... if a child needs to go to a doctor, and the parent doesn't take them... yes, the child should be removed from the parent; not because i think government needs more power, but because the parent is intentionally failing to do THE BIGGEST FUCKING JOB of being a parent.... keeping their child safe and well. Those parents should also be arrested for child abuse.
You would do well in a Fascist government...
Not everyone believes in the same thing you do... you are trying to impose your worldview on other people...
Not everyone believes in going to doctors, just like the Amish don't believe in using modern technology. Do you think they should all be locked up?
You want to control other people and make them live the way you do. You're actually no different to ISIS or the Taliban. What is sad is that you don't even see it.
Slashdot Mirror
I do NOT think people should decline it...
I don't think the government has the right to FORCE it...
Clearer now?
There is a fine line between physical punishment and abuse.
Spankings and other physical punishment is legal, abuse is not.
---
Example... It is my right to raise my child as a Vegan if I wish, however it is not my right to starve my child.
So I have control over my child's diet as I see fit, so long as they are actually getting food.
You're presuming the government representative will be friendly in return. They might but there are countless examples of them being anything but friendly.
In my experience, most professions in the government are quite friendly. I have worked with the FAA, the DEA, and had brief encounters with the FBI, all of whom were very pleasant.
To which they would likely respond by putting you in a jail cell until such time as you were able to consult your lawyer and then proceed with the search with or without your help. Probably would charge you with obstruction of justice at a minimum.
I suspect we are talking about two different things.
First, if they simply want to bust in and conduct a search via force, they don't need a NSL to do it, they have guns and can be thugs any time they want.
Second, when the FBI visits your office because they want information about a customer, they don't come in with a dozen agents with guns, two men in suits come in and hand your their business card and say, "we would like to ask you a few questions about a customer of yours that we have concerns about".
At which point I say, "why don't you come into my office and we can talk".
When they come in, they say, "we understand you have been flying customer XYZ, we would like to know where he is going, who he is flying with, and what they are doing when they get there."
To which I reply, "I would be happy to help you, however due to privacy rules, I cannot release customer information without a court order. If you have a warrant from a court of law for this information, I would be happy to comply".
They come back the next morning with such an order, I provide the information, everyone is happy.
Exactly... I'm giving them a clear and fairly easy path to a yes that also happens to comply with the law...
I'm not under any illusions of being some tough guy who can just laugh and say "no, and you can't make me". That would be stupid, and the easy way or the hard way, if they really want to make me, they can.
I always thought that Summer Glau would make a good Jedi...
She has the martial skills for it, the body to make it work, and she's... just cool...
Well lets see...
DDT
Lead Paint
Asbestos
All items the government once said, "oh sure, that is safe and good for you..."
err...
"wait, no, all bad, lets ban them!"
How about this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
What was considered harmless 50 years ago is now considered quite toxic...
So... the government is right now and can't make any mistakes, right? RIGHT?
---
Yes, lets go inject EVERYONE with stuff and I'm sure we'll NEVER find a reason EVER to decide maybe it wasn't a good idea...
I of course don't know if that is the case, but I think we should be a WHOLE LOT MORE SURE before we do it. This is the whole human race we're talking about after all...
Look up the Holocaust...
"Observe adult role models outside the family." That I got to do, and lost all respect for authority. Of course reading history books contributed. Hint, if you want a well adjusted kid don't have him do a report on the Holocaust after reading two or three histories on it and meeting a survivor like I did at age 8.
When I was 10 years old, my parents took me to Europe, including to the Netherlands where I got to go see Anne Frank's house...
I've seen the remains of the camps, what the Nazis did is evil... it is sad that so many people around the world don't really understand how pure evil people in government can do such things, but they can and have...
That is good advice... :)
The FBI would likely explain that the secret judge had already secretly signed a secret warrant in the secret court, sorry we can't show you but pinky swear it exists. That's the sort of rule of law we have these days, sadly.
To which I would, very politely reply, "that might be true, I'm not a lawyer and honestly don't know. I'll have to consult with my lawyer and get back to you. Rest assured it is my intention to comply with the law, but I need to know what the law is first and my lawyer is the professional who advises me of that"
I would also politely suggest that if they would like a quicker response, bring me a normal warrant signed by a judge and they'll get instant service.
---
I fully understand the attitude of many police officers and federal agents, they think walking into a business and flashing their badge gets them access, and often it probably does. Some people probably comply out of a sense of being a patriot, or just to get them out of their office.
On the other hand, I don't hand out business information to anyone who just walks into the door, at least not without a court order.
---
May I say... the whole idea of dealing with anyone from the government, be police or FBI, is to show respect for their position and for the law, I find that goes a long way towards having friendly conversations. There is no room for "tough guy" talk, they'll win that one...
Suicide is not illegal
Are you sure? For the most part, in many countries today, it no longer is (because such laws are silly anyway), but for most of history, it has been VERY illegal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
And is it really okay to allow somebody not to go to the doctor if it's in the interest of public health, so they don't spread diseases on to others? No?
Yes, it is...
Now if someone is actually sick, as in infected right this second, with... lets say... Ebola... then yes, it makes sense that you have to prevent them from walking around a shopping mall. I highly doubt you'll find ANYONE who thinks that is ok.
But people without vaccines are not infected...
How about in an extreme example where a kid has ebola? Should parents be allowed to refuse medical treatment, and continue to expose the kid to other kids?
No, medial confinement in the case of an ACTUAL infection is reasonable, everyone agrees with that (even the anti-doctor religions do)
Can parents refuse medical treatment for their kids? Depends on the age... If the kid is 17? I say the kid can do what he/she wants. 7? Yes... What age is the cutoff? That is another topic...
Parent refuse vaccines, their kids can get sick and infect others who had no choice in the matter.
It is the parent's right to raise the child as he/she sees fit. The more you step on that, the worse it gets. You might be happy with this specific issue, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
No matter how moral or just your cause is, doing wrong is never right.
You misunderstand...
Being polite and considerate goes a long way when dealing with men in suits from the government. When you show that you're a law abiding citizen who is happy to comply with the law, that helps too.
Simply informing them that you're happy to comply when presented a warrant from a judge gives them a clear path to get what they want.
Anything else? Never heard of it, will have to discuss with my lawyer.
The warrant can be obtained in less than 24 hours, the other path takes longer.
But go ahead and think whatever you want... :)
---
Side note, regarding the FBI agents with guns. While they do generally carry guns, they don't normally make arrests themselves, they would bring the police, or if a more serious situation, agents with body armor and better gear.
Two men in suits standing in your office having a pleasant conversation with a friendly person are not going to whip out guns. If they actually did say, "we have to place you under arrest", my reply would be, "sure, please call the local police and have them come do it, you're two guys in suits with business cards, I'm not going anywhere with you without local law enforcement present.
It is no different than if someone who claims to be an undercover cop tries to stop you. You simple call the police, or ask them to bring out a uniformed officer. Criminals don't do that, so that is a reasonable request within your rights.
Yes they do, and if they came in guns drawn, I of course would offer no resistance.
I would then call my lawyer. They would have to charge me with something in front of a judge, at which point they are going to have a hard time explaining why I'm there since I didn't actually do anything.
Now if the judge wants to issue a warrant for the information the FBI is asking for, then of course I would comply. The judge can also order me to not reveal anything about the case for security reasons, and I can respect that too. The key part is the judge is doing the ordering, not the FBI.
My issue is with the FBI just deciding they can ask for anything they want without a warrant.
While I don't care to get into details for obvious reasons, I can tell you that they can be compelled to get a warrant. All I'll say is that I've been served before, I've had the FBI standing in my office and I complied because there was a warrant issued by a judge.
And that is how it is supposed to happen.
---
Side note, while it is true the FBI can charge you with a crime for ignoring a NSL, that charge isn't secret... let me just say that when told politely that you'll comply with a warrant, they can get one pretty quickly (less than 24 hours in the above case) so it really isn't asking that much of them.
Posting it just confirms that you received it.
Tear it up and shred it, it is just a letter that has no power.
"no approval from a judge is required for the FBI to issue an NSL."
That means it is worthless, when a court decides to issue an order for something, then I'll care.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
I'm well aware that most large companies just comply, they don't care... I do, I consider NSLs to be unconstitutional, get a judge to issue a warrant and I'll be willing to comply.
My truck has auto emergency braking...
I can also turn it off...
What is to stop someone from saying that their religion requires their children to carry and scatter peanuts everywhere they go? Should children of this religion be allowed in public schools even though their presence may, and probably will, kill other students?
That is taking an active approach to spreading a problem.
If a child actually had the measles, it would be reasonable to not allow them into school until they were healthy again.
My child doesn't have measles, so explain to me why you don't want them in school?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
Perhaps you should expand your worldview... there is more on Earth than Western Medicine...
Something like vaccination is a simple utilitarian decision of a society that the good of the majority outweighs the freedom of a few.
You must like the idea of mob rule then...
The problem with your logic is that ANY cause that is "just enough" or "helps enough people", can be justified.
Take the idea that you could cure all cancer in the world tomorrow, if you simply kill 1,000 innocent children?
Do you do it? It would sure save a LOT more lives than you're taking, millions even, including children...
But it would still be morally wrong, wouldn't it? I would at least HOPE you'd see that as morally wrong, but from some of the posts here, I wonder...
Your rights ends when you carry a highly contagious disease and you put others at risk.
To a limited extent, perhaps...
But not getting vaccinated doesn't fit that profile, now does it?
I'm not refusing treatment for Anthrax infection, now am I?
I'm not putting you at risk by sending my children to school, they aren't infected by anything we vaccinate for.
Vaccinations shouldn't be mandatory, however, they only work if the group as a whole is vaccinated. How do you propose we solve this paradox?
My biggest issue is that we're injecting everyone with stuff that hasn't been subject to the same sets of standards as normal medication and because it is immune to lawsuits, isn't being challenged the way normal medication can be.
We should have much stricter checks and studies on vaccines than we do other medication, instead we have less.
I actually believe in the concept of vaccines. What I don't trust is the current way they are made and the lack of proper testing and studies.
Formaldehyde and Mercury are still in some of them, and many of them were developed many years ago, the long term risks of injecting everyone with these is really not known (20 years is not long term, 200 years is getting there, longer still is really long term).
Anything that we as a people decide should be injected into every man, woman, and child, should be subject to the greatest degree of study and evaluation possible, or you risk causing a long term problem greater than the original disease.
---
I am not a medical expert, but I am wise enough to know that you shouldn't gamble with the future of human evolution without making really sure that your solution isn't worse than the problem you're trying to solve.
Not enough time has passed to really know the long term outcome.
My religion is my business... not yours or the governments... that is the whole point of freedom of religion...
The minute you start deciding what is a "real" religion, you've just gotten yourself into the religion business, and that is completely against the constitution.
Um... no. You do not have the right to put those around you at risk. If you don't vaccinate your children, they shouldn't be allowed to go to public school, period.
Ahh, logic, such a nice concept that fails to work on so many people.
So, what about the mall? The movie theater? You think your kids don't go there? You think vaccinated kids don't go there?
The whole public school thing is just another measure of control, a way for the Federal Government to try and stick its nose into more states rights using money.
So you're all hung up on schools... why? You somehow think that protects your kids?
Polio was indeed a problem... but not nearly as big a problem as Fascist governments are...
How many people did Polio kill in the entire 20th Century?
How many people did Fascist governments kill in the entire 20th Century?
Go ahead, look up some numbers, I'll wait.
If you don't understand why there's a program to compensate people who have negative reactions to vaccines, you shouldn't talk about it.... it makes you look stupid.
The government giving me money because my child was harmed by a drug they were forced to take does not repair my child.
Just to be clear though... if a child needs to go to a doctor, and the parent doesn't take them... yes, the child should be removed from the parent; not because i think government needs more power, but because the parent is intentionally failing to do THE BIGGEST FUCKING JOB of being a parent.... keeping their child safe and well. Those parents should also be arrested for child abuse.
You would do well in a Fascist government...
Not everyone believes in the same thing you do... you are trying to impose your worldview on other people...
Not everyone believes in going to doctors, just like the Amish don't believe in using modern technology. Do you think they should all be locked up?
You want to control other people and make them live the way you do. You're actually no different to ISIS or the Taliban. What is sad is that you don't even see it.