Ammo is the problem. But I can imagine them being created and distributed among gangs. You think urban crime is bad now? You haven't seen nothing yet once the basement dwelling production starts.
Malarky.
Gang bangers can get a Saturday Night Special for less than $100 on the black market, one that's good for several shots. A 3d printed gun is good for maybe 1 shot, barring catastrophic failure, and use hundreds of dollars worth of material, not to mention the cost of the printer to make them with.
The whole "OMG cheap guns for criminals" angle is pure FUD.
Why is no one screaming to Congress to ban automobiles?
Because restrictions on automobiles might inconvenience them, so it's not up for discussion. Same goes for any mention of the deaths caused by swimming pool accidents.
Further supporting my contention that gun-grabbers couldn't give two shits about 'protecting the children' or saving lives.
Are you implying that the difference of protons and neutrons is what defines personal property vs non personal property?
I'm sure the founding fathers didn't make that distinction
The founding fathers made that exact argument. If you cant hold it in your had or otherwise posses it, it isn't personal property.
[Citation needed]
4th amdendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The founding fathers listed tangible personal and real property in the amendment.
You missed something: The definitions of papers and effects.
Also - they never mentioned television or the internet, either, but it's generally accepted that the 1st Amendment applies to them.
Encrypting your email with something like PGP and a very small key is analgous to putting an envelope around the postcard - it establishes your intent that people not read your mail and stops folks from doing so trivially or accidentally.
No; encryption is more akin to writing your letter in code.
The SSL protocol that pretty much every email service on the planet uses would be analogous to the envelope.
Well then we just need for Police Police to Police Police.
If, by that, you mean "citizen committees with the power to remove officers from duty and prosecute them for criminal violations," then yes, yes we do.
FYI, your third Police shouldn't have been capitalized, as it was used as a common verb instead of a proper noun (still, good wordplay).
So basically your stance is - if you mail a letter in a sealed envelope, it's fair game, but if the letter is written in code, it's not.
I'd argue it's slightly different. An unsecured packet is more like a postcard than a sealed envelope.
OK, then, here's an example: I just sent an email to my wife. If intercepting and reading the message is as trivial as you posit it is, then feel free to do so and post the contents of said email here.
Bullshit - my papers and effects are my papers and effects, regardless of where I keep them.
Could you imagine how hard it would be for banks to sell safety deposit space, if there was no guarantee other people weren't able to rifle through your shit?
It comes down to the legal argument over an expectation of privacy. You expect a bank to keep the contents of a safety deposit box private. Arguing unencrypted emails, facebook posts, tweets, etc.
False equivalence - An email is a direct communication between two parties, whereas facebook posts and tweets are publicly posted.
No one is ever going to take up arms against the government, and if someone does, he's easily dismissed as a kook by the media, and killed in a hail of gunfire and we all cheer on TV that we've been "saved" from this guy by the long arm of oppression.
Yea, that's probably why all the media coverage of the 'celebration' after the capture of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev made me want to wretch... too eerily reminiscent of the '2-Minute Hate' from 1984....
Well you can open either one but if you can't read it then you need seek a warrant to get me to decode the information for you. If you cared about the sensitivity of the information you would of secured it in the place so I actually do support that concept. If you leave the information open and readable with out effort then fine, but if you take the time to encode the information then it's not open game.
But in the case of a sealed envelope, it's not open by definition. It shouldn't matter whether the information within is encrypted or not, because your rights have already been violated by virtue of the fact that the seal was broken by someone other than the intended recipient; which, concerning physical mailings, is already a crime.
What makes you think electronic communications should be treated any different?
Safety deposit boxes are different since you have a lock on it.
If I simply give you an unsealed packet of papers, I am assuming the risk you'll had those over to the government if they ask you for them even if I ask you not to. There's no 4th amendment protection under those circumstances. This is analogous to using a web mail provider like gmail, hotmail, etc. where you're asking them to store plain text emails.
OK, then go access my gmail account and post all the content therein online.
Oh, wait, you can't, because that account has a fucking lock on it, that only I (and Google, supposedly) have a key to.
"Pentagon spokesman George Little said, 'We have repeatedly stated that . . . our forces were unable to reach it in time to intervene to stop the attacks.'
These are essentially the same people who had solid intel that could have prevented the 9/11/2001 attacks, but did nothing with it.
Considering recent history, believing a word these vile fucks say is suckerdom to the n-th degree.
And the entirety of the 4th amendment is eliminated by storing your data on somebody else's system since it's no longer considered part of YOUR "persons, houses, papers, and effects"
Still like "the cloud"?
Bullshit - my papers and effects are my papers and effects, regardless of where I keep them.
Could you imagine how hard it would be for banks to sell safety deposit space, if there was no guarantee other people weren't able to rifle through your shit?
Slashdot Mirror
Ammo is the problem. But I can imagine them being created and distributed among gangs. You think urban crime is bad now? You haven't seen nothing yet once the basement dwelling production starts.
Malarky.
Gang bangers can get a Saturday Night Special for less than $100 on the black market, one that's good for several shots. A 3d printed gun is good for maybe 1 shot, barring catastrophic failure, and use hundreds of dollars worth of material, not to mention the cost of the printer to make them with.
The whole "OMG cheap guns for criminals" angle is pure FUD.
http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/Untangling_the_Web.pdf
Didn't realize Kim Jong Un had a /. account...
...
Presented by Dice.com
The whole point was to prove that antigun laws are as useless and counterproductive as the war on drugs.
Gun control works quite well in countries that have decided to implement it nationwide.
Indeed - just look at how little gun crime there is in places like Iran and North Korea.
Oh, were those not the nations you were thinking of?
Why is no one screaming to Congress to ban automobiles?
Because restrictions on automobiles might inconvenience them, so it's not up for discussion. Same goes for any mention of the deaths caused by swimming pool accidents.
Further supporting my contention that gun-grabbers couldn't give two shits about 'protecting the children' or saving lives.
Which guns? All the ones I own just sit there until acted upon by a human.
I keep hearing tales of these guns that kill people all on their own, but I've yet to encounter one myself.
Yeah, but this is the *hip*, *new* way to create cheap-ass zip guns!
No, it's the hip new way of creating zip guns that cost more than several actual firearms would, considering the cost of the printer and materials.
I'm too young to be complicit in the current state of affairs. Who shall I blame for the state of the shit hole world I've been born into?
Your own complacent attitude, for starters.
What was it that Ghandi said? "Be the change that you wish to see in the world."
Are you implying that the difference of protons and neutrons is what defines personal property vs non personal property?
I'm sure the founding fathers didn't make that distinction
The founding fathers made that exact argument. If you cant hold it in your had or otherwise posses it, it isn't personal property.
[Citation needed]
4th amdendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The founding fathers listed tangible personal and real property in the amendment.
You missed something: The definitions of papers and effects.
Also - they never mentioned television or the internet, either, but it's generally accepted that the 1st Amendment applies to them.
Encrypting your email with something like PGP and a very small key is analgous to putting an envelope around the postcard - it establishes your intent that people not read your mail and stops folks from doing so trivially or accidentally.
No; encryption is more akin to writing your letter in code.
The SSL protocol that pretty much every email service on the planet uses would be analogous to the envelope.
Does the same logic mean that the government can not reject FOI requests for emails and can not redact anything in emails?
Good question, who's up for trying?
Are you implying that the difference of protons and neutrons is what defines personal property vs non personal property?
I'm sure the founding fathers didn't make that distinction
The founding fathers made that exact argument. If you cant hold it in your had or otherwise posses it, it isn't personal property.
[Citation needed]
Well then we just need for Police Police to Police Police.
If, by that, you mean "citizen committees with the power to remove officers from duty and prosecute them for criminal violations," then yes, yes we do.
FYI, your third Police shouldn't have been capitalized, as it was used as a common verb instead of a proper noun (still, good wordplay).
So basically your stance is - if you mail a letter in a sealed envelope, it's fair game, but if the letter is written in code, it's not.
I'd argue it's slightly different. An unsecured packet is more like a postcard than a sealed envelope.
OK, then, here's an example: I just sent an email to my wife. If intercepting and reading the message is as trivial as you posit it is, then feel free to do so and post the contents of said email here.
If you can't, then your point is moot.
Regardless of how the packet is encapsulated you just need to be a NIC in "monitoring" and you'll see all the data.
Which constitutes a search.
Which, per the 4th Amendment, is illegal for the government to do without a warrant.
Not sure why you're having so much trouble understanding that...
I pay nothing to Google for their gmail.
Ooooh, yes you do. Perhaps not with dollars and cents, but you definitely pay for it.
Best to never forget that.
Bullshit - my papers and effects are my papers and effects, regardless of where I keep them.
Could you imagine how hard it would be for banks to sell safety deposit space, if there was no guarantee other people weren't able to rifle through your shit?
It comes down to the legal argument over an expectation of privacy. You expect a bank to keep the contents of a safety deposit box private. Arguing unencrypted emails, facebook posts, tweets, etc.
False equivalence - An email is a direct communication between two parties, whereas facebook posts and tweets are publicly posted.
No one is ever going to take up arms against the government, and if someone does, he's easily dismissed as a kook by the media, and killed in a hail of gunfire and we all cheer on TV that we've been "saved" from this guy by the long arm of oppression.
Yea, that's probably why all the media coverage of the 'celebration' after the capture of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev made me want to wretch... too eerily reminiscent of the '2-Minute Hate' from 1984....
We've always been at war with Eastasia...
Fucking scary.
Well you can open either one but if you can't read it then you need seek a warrant to get me to decode the information for you. If you cared about the sensitivity of the information you would of secured it in the place so I actually do support that concept. If you leave the information open and readable with out effort then fine, but if you take the time to encode the information then it's not open game.
But in the case of a sealed envelope, it's not open by definition. It shouldn't matter whether the information within is encrypted or not, because your rights have already been violated by virtue of the fact that the seal was broken by someone other than the intended recipient; which, concerning physical mailings, is already a crime.
What makes you think electronic communications should be treated any different?
It ends when prosecutors start sending prosecutors to jail for misconduct.
FTFY, and identified the real problem at the same time.
If self-policing worked, we wouldn't have need for police, you know?
Safety deposit boxes are different since you have a lock on it.
If I simply give you an unsealed packet of papers, I am assuming the risk you'll had those over to the government if they ask you for them even if I ask you not to. There's no 4th amendment protection under those circumstances. This is analogous to using a web mail provider like gmail, hotmail, etc. where you're asking them to store plain text emails.
OK, then go access my gmail account and post all the content therein online.
Oh, wait, you can't, because that account has a fucking lock on it, that only I (and Google, supposedly) have a key to.
"Pentagon spokesman George Little said, 'We have repeatedly stated that . . . our forces were unable to reach it in time to intervene to stop the attacks.'
These are essentially the same people who had solid intel that could have prevented the 9/11/2001 attacks, but did nothing with it.
Considering recent history, believing a word these vile fucks say is suckerdom to the n-th degree.
If you can sniff the network and easily read what I sent then fine. If I secure my emails so they don't appear in plain text then I think you do.
So basically your stance is - if you mail a letter in a sealed envelope, it's fair game, but if the letter is written in code, it's not.
Strange philosophy you have there.
And the entirety of the 4th amendment is eliminated by storing your data on somebody else's system since it's no longer considered part of YOUR "persons, houses, papers, and effects"
Still like "the cloud"?
Bullshit - my papers and effects are my papers and effects, regardless of where I keep them.
Could you imagine how hard it would be for banks to sell safety deposit space, if there was no guarantee other people weren't able to rifle through your shit?