Save the Children!


Justifying government snooping
Once again we have proof that anytime a politico says anything about protecting children, he wants to sacrifice your freedom.

At a hearing last week, Rep. Ed Whitfield, a Kentucky Republican who heads a House oversight and investigations subcommittee, suggested that data retention laws would be useful to police investigating crimes against children.

"I absolutely think that that is an idea that is worth pursuing," an aide to Whitfield said in an interview on Thursday. "If those files were retained for a longer period of time, it would help in the uncovering and prosecution of these crimes." Another hearing is planned for April 27.

Internet providers generally offer three reasons why they are skeptical of mandatory data retention: first, it is not clear who will be able to access records of someone's online behavior; second, it's not clear who will pay for the data warehouses to be constructed; and third, it's not clear that police are hindered by current law as long as they move swiftly in investigations.

This is one of those smoke and mirror tricks.

There is no widespread crime here. There is nothing to indicate that widespread data retention will prevent crime. And I promise you that IF this were put into place, the government side of the monitoring would be so full of holes that you might as well make your credit card number your email address.

They don't even promise that it will cut down on child pornography,

It "might" be useful.

Before we agree to this farce, can anyone tell me when one of the Federal government's crusades against immorality actually stopped the behavior it was aimed at?

— NeoWayland

Posted: Fri - April 14, 2006 at 07:57 AM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved