Cyber spying, should it be allowed?

[stdave1]

It seems these days a lot of countries including my own (Canada) are trying to get laws passed so that the cops can spy on whatever you are doing on the net (sites, email, etc) without going to a judge first and without your knowledge. Any thoughts on this, do you think it's going to far?

 

[sole seeker1]

I don't know anything about the Canadian Constitution... but in the United States that would be a violation of our Constitution.

We have a right to privacy within fairly broad limits. This includes communication via telephone. My computer goes out through a phone line, so in my view this communication should be as protected as a verbal conversation over the phone.

Just my 2 cents... of course given today's economy that's worth lest than a farthing!

 

[lazy_tickler]

hell yeah i think its going too far but they will probably do it ehind our backs anyway

 

[Yet_One_More_Idiot]

I think it's also against privacy laws in the UK - no constitution, but I'm pretty certain it's against the Bill of Rights. Especially with Cherie "Human Rights" Blair in so much power. 😀

Also, on a slightly different note, imagine this cyber-spying DID happen; would YOU want cyber-police watching you while you're visiting the TT?

 

[Goodieluver]

The patriot act here now makes it somewhat legal to cyber spy, but even before that, there is a super computer in the west that scans phone lines and now computer lines for key words and records them, fbi has aknowledged this.

Point is this, if they dont and somethin bad happens, people shit on the govt, if they do anything, theyre shit on for infringing

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

Don't think for a second people that cyber spying is some little department that works out of a closest or cubicle or something, either. Its a HUGE part of our nation's Intelligence divisions and it's been used more times than anyone will ever know to bring people to justice and/or to root them out. This is more and more true in lieu of heighten acts of terrorism from our own people as well as the efforts from abroad.

Whether or not its completely legal, moral, or constitution is a secondary issue to them, really. Some lines you just have to cross for the greater good, whatever that may be in any given circumstance.

 

[Hiryu]

Vlad is right. These guys make their own rules. The government already monitors emails which is why people -like me for instance- are careful what they type through those mails. I figure the only reason they haven't come gunning for me yet (I'm sometimes naughty when it comes to internet laws) is because they already know that I'm maddog krazee and unpredictable. :happy:

 

[Yet_One_More_Idiot]

This all applies to the US; to what extent is cyberspying conducted in the UK though, for instance?

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I don't see why it wouldn't be the same there either, especially if you've got similar branches working in unison, as a larger cell or network. In fact, tracking the efforts of people who have attempted to evade custody is easier with shared information. If some prolific bomber is being tracked to the UK, for example, he/she may be out of US jurisdiction, but the pursuit goes on at the hand of the UK agents.

I'm sure such branches exist and work in unison all the time, as one large intercontinental organization completely underminding US and foreign law (and vice versa) in the process in order to track their marks and their activities.

 

[chickles_:)]

Oh wow! :wooha:

I only can imagine the idea of the police being able to pry and spy.

I do agree with the fact that there are investigations where wire tapping or letter intercepting or e-mail opening etc. would be necessary. But what i hear you talking about, stdave, is what about when there is no requirement to go through legal channels to do so?

That's right some scary! :weird:

From what i understand, that sort of thing pretty much violates all western constitutions. The only thing is that every such constitution that i'm aware of, allows for some version of a "notwithstanding" clause. In other words, the civil rights of citizens are protected with language just vague enough to allow gov'ts to pass legislation that allows for "special measures" to be enacted around those rights.

My big question remains for all such action: if one does away with due process as a requirement for violating privacy, who is left to police the police?

If history teaches us anything, it's that people, no matter how well intentioned, are nonetheless frail. Where there is no transparent accountability, corruption creeps in, slowly at first and then like a flood.
Just look at Enron, or Bri-X!

While there can be times where a violation of privacy is necessary, i think it must always be necessary to show just cause to a dis-interested third party before any such action happens. Otherwise we have essentially set ourselves on the inevitable road to a Big Brother Police state that will make the former Soviet Union look like the land of liberty.

--gee, Chickles, don't hold back, girl. Tell us how you really feel!! 😱 😱

Sorry for the rant. But i honestly feel scared about the direction we are all going in the headlong pursuit of some elusive, dare i say, unattainable "security"

Many blessings,

 

[morgandee]

cyberspying on perversion is no less perverted than the perverted act the person is spying upon and is only some sort of projection of their own internal perversions, and that is just as weird

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

Oh wow! :wooha:

I only can imagine the idea of the police being able to pry and spy.

I do agree with the fact that there are investigations where wire tapping or letter intercepting or e-mail opening etc. would be necessary. But what i hear you talking about, stdave, is what about when there is no requirement to go through legal channels to do so?

That's right some scary! :weird:

From what i understand, that sort of thing pretty much violates all western constitutions. The only thing is that every such constitution that i'm aware of, allows for some version of a "notwithstanding" clause. In other words, the civil rights of citizens are protected with language just vague enough to allow gov'ts to pass legislation that allows for "special measures" to be enacted around those rights.

My big question remains for all such action: if one does away with due process as a requirement for violating privacy, who is left to police the police?

If history teaches us anything, it's that people, no matter how well intentioned, are nonetheless frail. Where there is no transparent accountability, corruption creeps in, slowly at first and then like a flood.
Just look at Enron, or Bri-X!

While there can be times where a violation of privacy is necessary, i think it must always be necessary to show just cause to a dis-interested third party before any such action happens. Otherwise we have essentially set ourselves on the inevitable road to a Big Brother Police state that will make the former Soviet Union look like the land of liberty.

--gee, Chickles, don't hold back, girl. Tell us how you really feel!! 😱 😱

Sorry for the rant. But i honestly feel scared about the direction we are all going in the headlong pursuit of some elusive, dare i say, unattainable "security"

Many blessings,

Theres going to be alot more to consider when the chips are implanted in our hand.

 

[Hiryu]

Man, the government knows everything about it's citizens. They know we're typing this shit right now. Almost every home in America is most likely bugged and cammed by now. May sound crazy but, sometimes it pays to be paranoid. Just face it; There is no privacy anymore. Everything you think you do behind closed doors is monitered by government agents and placed in a file. I've got to the point that I don't even care anymore if they see me naked or hear me thinking aloud. To hell with what they think of me. It doesn't matter how much power they obtain, they wipe shit off of their asses just like everyone else and will never be any better than the rest of us.

Theres going to be alot more to consider when the chips are implanted in our hand.

Not my hand nor my head. To the one who sets it in motion, I hope I get the chance to dis you and spit in your face before all of your followers.