RE: CRIME Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland

From: webb1973 (webb1973@private)
Date: Thu Nov 22 2001 - 16:28:40 PST

  • Next message: JACKSON Di M: "RE: CRIME Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland"

    I see. What we seem to have here is a failure to communicate. What does the
    4th Amendment have to do with the question of whether 5,000 people
    nationwide should be asked a few questions? Are you assuming that these
    people are going to be arrested and then questioned? That's not how it
    works. If they were to be arrested, then the 4th will kick in. This is not
    an adversarial situation. Nor is it custodial. It's just asking questions.
    Your comparison to race and black Americans is an old ruse. We should be
    beyond that trick. I repeat, you misunderstand the 4th Amendment's
    application to what is being asked of law enforcement.
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-crime@/var/spool/majordomo/lists/crime
    [mailto:owner-crime@/var/spool/majordomo/lists/crime]On Behalf Of
    Crispin Cowan
    Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 3:31 PM
    To: webb1973
    Cc: crime@private
    Subject: Re: CRIME Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland
    
    
    webb1973 wrote:
    
    >Yeah. Way to go, Chief. I'm sure the families who lost loved ones on 9-11
    >will enthusiastically support your politically correct decision. And, if,
    >and when one or more of the 200 non-citizens does something to contribute
    to
    >more deaths from another terrorist activity, they'll fully understand your
    >decision not to ask questions because it was the politically correct thing
    >to do. Isn't America great!
    >
    Since when is honoring the Bill of Rights (specifically, the 4th
    Amendment http://www.nara.gov/exhall/charters/billrights/billrights.html
    ) "political correctness"?! With equal validity, you could argue that a
    violent crime is likely to be committed by a young black man in the next
    week, and mandate "interviewing" all young black men. There is a reason
    that arbitrary search and seizure is unconstitutional.
    
    ObCRIME Mailing list: It was recently reported
    http://www.msnbc.com/news/660096.asp?cp1=1
    that the FBI has added a new feature ("Magic Lantern") to Carnivore that
    will seek to obtain crypto keys from suspects' computers using an e-mail
    virus. An interesting question I have not seen answered is whether the
    FBI or other government agencies will need a warrent to deploy such
    tools, or to use the fruits there of. Anyone in law enforcement have a
    clue of whether you need a warrent to hack into a suspect's computer? Or
    is someone stupid enough to run Microsoft Outlook as their mail client
    considered to have just brought it on themselves?
    
    Crispin
    
    --
    Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
    Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc. http://wirex.com
    Security Hardened Linux Distribution:       http://immunix.org
    Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun May 26 2002 - 11:32:05 PDT