Apparently, Hardy Myers will be rendering his opinion to various state agencies today. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,39474,00.html It sounds like various questions (out of 2 dozen) may be considered inappropriate, but on the whole the concept of questioning the 200 potential interviewees is not illegal. -----Original Message----- From: webb1973 [mailto:webb1973@private] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 11:15 PM To: Ron_Deming@private Cc: crime@private; Crispin Cowan; 'webb1973'; owner-crime./var/spool/majordomo/lists/crime@private; Busby, Richard Subject: Re: CRIME Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland Careful, Mr. Deming, you are coming close to the edge of what has already been labeled by some members of this group, including one recent immigrant who spews unusually strong anti-American government sentiments, as "patriotic jingoism." I haven't read the statute, but I can't imagine any statute, state or federal, that would restrict a police officer from carrying out an interview of anyone with information relating to a crime that has been committed. To my knowledge, every law enforcement agency in the United States has opened a case on the terror attack of 9-11, so that they may share information despite certain state or federal restrictions. I agree withn you, I doubt that the Or. statute would prohibit such contact. But, there I go again, getting off topic and being a patriotic jingoist. Damn bad habit in this group. ----- Original Message ----- From: <Ron_Deming@private> To: "webb1973" <webb1973@private> Cc: <crime@private>; "Crispin Cowan" <crispin@private>; "'webb1973'" <MSN/webb1973@private>; <owner-crime./var/spool/majordomo/lists/crime@private>; "Busby, Richard" <richardb@private> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 4:25 PM Subject: RE: CRIME Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland > > Don't be overly impressed by this statute. It's being widely quoted, and > used as justification for Mr. Kirkland's response to the FBI's request for > assistance. I would suggest we are looking at a case of selective (and > silly) enforcement. If the statute were consistently applied as it's being > applied in this case, how would a police officer be able to ask neighbors > of a person whose house has been burglarized if the neighbors saw the > burglar, or had any other information that might be useful? Of course it's > legal for police to request an interview with private citizens about > information they may have as it relates to a crime that has been committed. > There is no obligation for the citizen to answer the questions, or even to > grant the interview. There is no "erosion" of rights here. > > It's quite distressing to see all this discussion of "rights", with little > or no parallel discussion of one's duty, as a citizen, to help with this > kind of investigation. Everyone seems eager to claim and protect > individual rights ( I suspect this is human nature - or, at least American > human nature), without acknowledging our responsibility, in the face of > external threat, to close ranks, and defer to the immediate needs of the > nation. The Bill of Rights is vitally important to us, but so is common > sense. I don't see any threat to the Fourth Amendment that would justify > all this hand-wringing. While we are busy arguing fine points of law and > philosophy, there are people (people, by the way, who don't concern > themselves with anyone's right to Life, Liberty, etc.) working diligently > to destroy us and our way of life. I'm a lot more worried about them than > I am of our government's motives in this matter. I think we need to deal > with the problem at hand, and worry about the niceties later. A newspaper > columnist summed it up pretty well recently: "A rattlesnake in the living > room tends to end all discussion of animal rights." > > Best Regards, > Ron Deming > > > > > "webb1973" <webb1973@private> > Sent by: To: "Busby, Richard" <richardb@private>, "'webb1973'" > owner-crime@/var/spool/majordomo/l <MSN/webb1973@private>, "Crispin Cowan" <crispin@private>, > ists/crime <crime@private> > cc: > Subject: RE: CRIME Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland > 11/23/01 05:35 PM > > > > > > > Good point. You added an element of which I was not aware. What is the Or. > Statute of which you speak? I was unaware that there was a statutory > restriction since I'm not an Oregon resident. With a statute as restrictive > as you describe, and if local law enforcement is prohibited from > participating in such interviews (questions), then I have no quarrell or > criticism of the Chief. Thanks for pointing that out. Also, you hit the > nail > on the head about appreciation of having the freedom to debate these > issues. > The country is great because of our personal freedoms and our inherent > right > to disagree. But there I go again, reverting to patriotic jingoism. Seems I > have the nasty habit of doing that. My only other comment is that we must > be > careful not to place labels on those with whom we disagree, rather than > engage them in sincere discourse. Arrogance weakens argument and honest > discourse suffers. Thanks for letting me know about the statute, it makes a > difference in the way I look at this issue. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-crime@/var/spool/majordomo/lists/crime > [mailto:owner-crime@/var/spool/majordomo/lists/crime]On Behalf Of Busby, > Richard > Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 3:42 PM > To: 'webb1973'; Crispin Cowan; crime@private > Subject: RE: CRIME Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland > > > Doesn't anyone see the irony of even being able to have this deabte? We > have > freedom of speech. If we didn't we could not even have this discussion. > That's what makes the country great. Each of us is entitled to our opinion. > In Oregon there is also the issue of a statute that indicates that no > person > can be questioned unless they are suspected of a crime. > > Civil liberties are never taken away in big pieces, thgey are eroded. as > Thomas Jefferson said "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." He was > talking about the citizenry watching out for what the government is doing. > > The fascists in the 30's took away rights slowly and piece by piece. Look > what happened there. I applaud any decision that upholds individual > rights. I am deeply troubled about the 9/11 attacks and the loss of life, > but that is, in my own personal opinion, absolutely no reason to take away > anyone's rights. > > Thanks for listening. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: webb1973 [mailto:MSN/webb1973@private] > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:13 PM > To: Crispin Cowan; crime@private > Subject: RE: CRIME Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland > > > 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! > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-crime@/var/spool/majordomo/lists/crime > [mailto:owner-crime@/var/spool/majordomo/lists/crime]On Behalf Of > Crispin Cowan > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 11:29 AM > To: crime@private > Subject: CRIME Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland > > > Kudos to Acting Police Chief Andrew Kirkland for defending civil > liberties > http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/21/national/21PORT.html?ex=1007363873&ei=1&en > > =978%20a71dca117098f > > Note: the above URL requires free "registration". You can access the > article using the user-ID/password combo of "cipherpunks/cipherpunks" or > "wirex/wirex". > > Crispin, card-carrying member of the EFF :-) > > -- > 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 - 11:33:39 PDT