Is catch the people not wise about what they do. People who use or carry drugs in public while matching probable cause profiles - people who don't know how to stand up for their rights with the cops. People who have chronic habits and establish unwise comfort zones (smoking in the car, etc.)
Think about it. The reason the War on Drugs must violate our rights to persist: discrete folk may easily maintain usage habits and businesses without arousing official attention or suspicion under normal levels of scrutiny.
But tell me this: if there are such smarter drug dealers, don't you think they may have picked their line of work, not to "addict morons to crack" (which can't be a very fulfilling role) but instead for some other cause? Civil disobedience? Contributing to a community of healthy drug users? Carrying a sacrament to the faithful?
Just a thought.
Take this sugar cube, this sugarcube broken for you...
i hear a lot of jokes about this (gallows humor, admittedly) but i have never known anyone to be searched/arrested on the basis of an anonymous tip, much less an unfounded one for the purpose of harassment.
When i ride the metro here in DC i wonder how long until the data from the security cams streams from the camera to the CO, protected only by a firewall maintained by apathetic metro employees. And how long until tracking a person across multiple camera views is automated?
And yet i still can't explain to those indifferent to security and privacy why they should care.
i'm not going to check your work here, but i thought i'd point out there are several solutions to this problem (that i know of) and i wouldn't be surprised to find more.
Yeah, ever since i shared this one with the CTO we've used it in the developer interview process.
i'm a bit suspicious when i am told a given event was a "riot". Maybe this is just a side-effect of having lived in LA, but this word seems to be ponied out whenever police want to justify extreme action against innocent citizens. And in this case, the term is being used to justify suggesting filial and professional persecution (without a trial or a verdict) on the basis of mere photographs which themselves do not necessarily show any crime being committed.
i wonder how public response to this would differ if the gathering had been composed primarily of non-students. Say a meeting of local Democratic Socialists was photographed and published, with a caveat for employers and potential mates. What do you think?
Right. And having lived in LA, i can tell you - nothing makes citizens' owning gun more necessary than that the cops do.
By and large, i wouldn't say that "gun culture kills people". Insiders to "gun culture" are in all likelihood more educated in safety and personal responsibility than outsiders; i'll draw a comparison here to a "psychedelic culture". And as with psychedelics, i'm thinking problems primarily arise when outsiders to the cultures (children at times) acquire the toys of the trade.
Just my thoughts - but i don't think, just because you yourself are uncomfortable with weapons, you should necessarily leap to the conclusion that NO ONE can be trusted with them. I feel sarcastic comments coming on, so i'll just close here.
Unless you offend a powerful special interest. Imagine the response to a site collecting & providing information on police officers who participate in busts of non-violent drug offenders. How helpful would this precedent be to them?
Still, it is a step forward.
Slashdot Mirror
Is catch the people not wise about what they do. People who use or carry drugs in public while matching probable cause profiles - people who don't know how to stand up for their rights with the cops. People who have chronic habits and establish unwise comfort zones (smoking in the car, etc.)
Think about it. The reason the War on Drugs must violate our rights to persist: discrete folk may easily maintain usage habits and businesses without arousing official attention or suspicion under normal levels of scrutiny.
But tell me this: if there are such smarter drug dealers, don't you think they may have picked their line of work, not to "addict morons to crack" (which can't be a very fulfilling role) but instead for some other cause? Civil disobedience? Contributing to a community of healthy drug users? Carrying a sacrament to the faithful?
Just a thought.
Take this sugar cube, this sugarcube broken for you...
Could you provide links to those cases you mentioned? a cursory search revealed nothing, but i'd love to know about this.
i hear a lot of jokes about this (gallows humor, admittedly) but i have never known anyone to be searched/arrested on the basis of an anonymous tip, much less an unfounded one for the purpose of harassment.
Anyone else heard of a case like this?
When i ride the metro here in DC i wonder how long until the data from the security cams streams from the camera to the CO, protected only by a firewall maintained by apathetic metro employees. And how long until tracking a person across multiple camera views is automated?
And yet i still can't explain to those indifferent to security and privacy why they should care.
i'm not going to check your work here, but i thought i'd point out there are several solutions to this problem (that i know of) and i wouldn't be surprised to find more.
Yeah, ever since i shared this one with the CTO we've used it in the developer interview process.
i'm a bit suspicious when i am told a given event was a "riot". Maybe this is just a side-effect of having lived in LA, but this word seems to be ponied out whenever police want to justify extreme action against innocent citizens. And in this case, the term is being used to justify suggesting filial and professional persecution (without a trial or a verdict) on the basis of mere photographs which themselves do not necessarily show any crime being committed.
i wonder how public response to this would differ if the gathering had been composed primarily of non-students. Say a meeting of local Democratic Socialists was photographed and published, with a caveat for employers and potential mates. What do you think?
you should probably be aware that "dropping" acid does not mean setting it on the floor.
Right. And having lived in LA, i can tell you - nothing makes citizens' owning gun more necessary than that the cops do. By and large, i wouldn't say that "gun culture kills people". Insiders to "gun culture" are in all likelihood more educated in safety and personal responsibility than outsiders; i'll draw a comparison here to a "psychedelic culture". And as with psychedelics, i'm thinking problems primarily arise when outsiders to the cultures (children at times) acquire the toys of the trade. Just my thoughts - but i don't think, just because you yourself are uncomfortable with weapons, you should necessarily leap to the conclusion that NO ONE can be trusted with them. I feel sarcastic comments coming on, so i'll just close here.
Unless you offend a powerful special interest. Imagine the response to a site collecting & providing information on police officers who participate in busts of non-violent drug offenders. How helpful would this precedent be to them? Still, it is a step forward.