home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!eff!eff-gate!usenet
- From: NEWSDAY1@delphi.com
- Subject: Re: Phreaks indicted
- Message-ID: <01GMVETA11WW8WW6TV@delphi.com>
- Originator: daemon@eff.org
- Sender: NEWSDAY1@delphi.com
- Nntp-Posting-Host: eff.org
- Organization: EFF mail-news gateway
- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:51:00 GMT
- Approved: usenet@eff.org
- Lines: 30
-
- bill@hacktic.nl writes:
-
- >Even true cop shows, like Dragnet, say "the names have been
- >changed to protect the innocent".
- Yes, but I always thought that this was to protect the innocent
- victims, not the perpetrators. And whether "Dragnet" is true, or
- maybe just based on truth, is another question.
-
- >Maybe a little more effort in preventing crime, instead of
- >building more prisons is in order in the country that has the
- >highest percentage of its population in incarcerated.
- No disagreement there.
-
- >It is all to obvious the vast majority of crime is repeat
- >business, which alot could have been prevented by keeping
- >all criminal records a state secret, accessable only to
- >the courts.
- Big disagreement there. I don't buy the argument that the "state"
- is a more responsible guardian of personal information, such as
- arrest records, than the public. I'd rather risk the minefield of
- public perceptions than trust a faceless bureaucrat as guardian
- of my private secrets. If I'm accused of a crime, I don't think
- I'd want Joe Friday to smile and say, "Your secret's safe with
- me." Also, what makes you so sure that repeat crime could be
- prevented by keeping the public in the dark regarding the names
- and crimes of the convicted? I'd like to know who they are,
- thank you.
-
- Evan Rudowski
-
-