“One of the arguments in favor of mass surveillance as presented in this video is that it is ‘legal.’ But the kinds of legalities being enshrined into law in this modern era are nothing like the natural law that was supposed to be the foundation of Western jurisprudence. The idea that a community would easily or logically adopt an ordinance that mandated that all inhabitants share every single communication with an overriding authority responsible for their ‘safety’ is a doubtful argument to make, in our view. Thus, it is not ‘natural’ – and bound to cause more problems than it solves in the end.”
Related posts:
Trump Betrays Trumpism: Syria in the Crosshairs
Obama: No warrantless wiretaps if you elect me [2008]
Massachusetts Drug Lab Review Getting Special Court Sessions
Court Deals Blow to Anonymity and First Amendment
Bitcoin Grows Up
Second passports not just a “trophy” for the ultra-wealthy
Loophole In Canadian Law: Bitcoin Businesses Aren’t Really Regulated
Syria’s Assad to West: ‘I Am Tougher Than Gaddafi’
Would you like being paid in gold? It’s possible… in Singapore
This Man Can't Say Why the Government Wants to Jail Him for a Century
Police Using 'Seatbelt Checkpoints' to Search Cars Without Warrants, Make Drug Arrests
Police Tackled, Arrested Homeowner Who Refused Warrantless Entry
Russia to ban cash transactions over $10,000
PayPal Urges Regulatory Reform
$200 to set up a lemonade stand in Illinois is 'insane': senator
