US Internet users beware...

[Lorde]

That aside, the government being allowed to snoop on people when they have probable cause is absolutely fine by me, but this goes well beyond that.

And that's the whole point of this. It's fine that the FBI is going to snoop on people on the internet. (Really? A bureaucracy at the federal level in charge of investigations might actually... investigate? You don't say.)  But get a god damn Warrant first. Thats basic 4th amendment rights there. And that's what (I hope) most people here are pissed about.

[fixet]

I'm thinking more than than a few people arguing this (not here, but in general) are more concerned about their lolis and/or cp, than anything else

as for me, the fbi holds no authority here, so meh

[Starry]

That's a pretty big generalization. Claiming that everyone from Group A doesn't like something because of B is, well, kind of ignorant. It fails to take into account varying viewpoints, and simply lumps everyone opposed to something as strawmen.

I suppose I'll just put forth this; to say one isn't free to break the law is sort of the point. The law inhibits freedom, so citizens in any country that allows for it should be ever watchful of the actions of those in power. Something being a law does not inherently make it just, so even if the current laws are based upon justice, an arguable case, giving those in power the ability to secretly, and thus unquestionably, enforce laws as a whole is foolish. And this is without taking into account the ability of the individual enforcers to abuse an expanded power.

This grab for more power isn't scary so much because of what it immediately allows, but because of what it may one day allow. Well, that and the fact that it might work despite the horrible record preceding it. Actually, that part might be scarier...

I'm sure I'll be scared when I have good reason to.  And yes, it was a pretty big generalization.  I wasn't claiming what you said I was.

Just doing all in my power to mock our theft happy world.

[LordJerle]

I'm thinking more than than a few people arguing this (not here, but in general) are more concerned about their lolis and/or cp, than anything else

as for me, the fbi holds no authority here, so meh

The point of arguing against this isn't that "Oh my god, I hope they don't see my loli's!", it's that people's computers are a lot like the home.  By allowing the FBI free access, you're pretty much opening all your info for them to see, which is unconstitutional.  Part of the reason of the revolutionary war was that English troops would walk in somebody's home unannounced and wreak havoc just because they didn't like the way you parted your hair. 

[fixet]

actually it would be more like the english making the clerk at the grocery store tell them what you bought every day of the past month, because they don't like the way you parted your hair

they don't see the actual content of your computer unless they access it, for which they would still need a warrant

[Lorde]

Agree with the clerk analogy. However, this is a "slippery slope". Today they don't need warrants for your search history, tomorrow they don't need warrants to check your bank info. etc. etc. It's not that it's the FBI's ultimate goal is to keep tabs on every American citizens computer. But that's the outcome you reach eventually when you go down the slope.

Also agree on both caveats for people Bawwing about loli censorship and people here not necessarily conforming to that mold. (Thank god) This is a real 4th amendment issue. Not just a "I demand the right to masturbate to bug eyed titless midgets" issue.

[Kaito]

Hey, I liek my bug-eyed titless midgets, thank you very much. And I'm getting tired of seeing this slippery slope argument. It's basically saying, we shouldn't ever do anything, even move, because it MIGHT cause an avalanche, so just stand still, and never ever move. The internet is a relatively new entity, and the laws concerning it are going to need a lot of adjustment and changes. Not to mention new laws entirely. The law is constantly being changed and revised, according to the whims of who WE vote into office. If you don't like how its going, vote for someone who agrees with you. As for the law, with new innovations, inventions, and the shifting of culture, it needs to be constantly changed and added to. And there will be old forgotten laws that never get repealed because it would take too much time and effort. I'm not saying all laws or good, or whats happening is good, neither am I saying its bad, but if you don't like it, try to change it, and if you get the majority, well you win, and if you don't, well then people must like where its going.

tl;dr vote Libertarian  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

[Lorde]

You might be tired of the slippery slope arguments but the bill of rights is there for a reason. And people defend it with "slippery slope" and "Give an inch, they will take a mile" for a reason as well. People with power tend to abuse it. As such, you need safety nets in place.

I have no problem with the gag orders or the FBI actually investigating suspects search records. The lack of warrants is my issue. If you want to expedite a search for time sensitive reasons (Trying to pin down what a terrorist cell is up to for example) create a special bureau of the government that handles handing out warrants like this. The time it would take to get a warrant with the American judicial systems current backlog would admittedly be rather slow. So have a few judges on call to review and grant or deny warrants as the need arises in an expedient manner.  At least there will be public record after the fact. And somebody to hold accountable if there is abuse of power. You don't circumvent the Bill of Rights just because it would be easier or cheaper to do so.

[Amoeba]

I'm sure I'll be scared when I have good reason to.  And yes, it was a pretty big generalization.  I wasn't claiming what you said I was.

Just doing all in my power to mock our theft happy world.

Ah, sorry about that then. Rereading it I see a few different ways to interpret that.

"I demand the right to masturbate to bug eyed titless midgets"

That's one of the funniest things I've read in awhile.

[Lorde]

That's one of the funniest things I've read in awhile.

The Ubiquitous "5000 hours in MS paint."


 
     

[TF]

Damn that's hot.

[LordJerle]

The Ubiquitous "5000 hours in MS paint."


 
     

OH MY GOD!  IT'S DOC'S SECRET GIRLFRIEND!

[ShiningRadiance]

Hey, I liek my bug-eyed titless midgets, thank you very much. And I'm getting tired of seeing this slippery slope argument. It's basically saying, we shouldn't ever do anything, even move, because it MIGHT cause an avalanche, so just stand still, and never ever move. The internet is a relatively new entity, and the laws concerning it are going to need a lot of adjustment and changes. Not to mention new laws entirely. The law is constantly being changed and revised, according to the whims of who WE vote into office. If you don't like how its going, vote for someone who agrees with you. As for the law, with new innovations, inventions, and the shifting of culture, it needs to be constantly changed and added to. And there will be old forgotten laws that never get repealed because it would take too much time and effort. I'm not saying all laws or good, or whats happening is good, neither am I saying its bad, but if you don't like it, try to change it, and if you get the majority, well you win, and if you don't, well then people must like where its going.

tl;dr vote Libertarian  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

Bull.


People who get in office generally lie to get in office.

[LordJerle]

I thought they got in office by shaking babies and kissing hands

[Bluebeholder]

And I thought it was by appealing to the largest amount of people who actually vote.