fiundagner
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2011
- Messages
- 210
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/08/08/ ... ss-system/
So the city that has made it illegal to have more than 16oz's of soda, where salt and trans-fats are banned from public restaurants, and where bottlefeeding is a crime against public health (and don't even get us started on the gun laws) has instituted a 100% 24-7/365 surveillance system upon all its residents. Furthermore it plans to sell it to other locations, for a measly 30% profit (does that qualify as an obscene profit? Think the government will tax it as one?)) The city already has a history of going beyond its borders and authority in trying to proactively enforce laws (their gun shop "sting" operations, their surveillance in other cities). Does anyone not think they wont abuse this power.
forget the old line about "if your not doing anything wrong you don't have anything to worry about". when laws were about punishing someone for doing something wrong it was one thing. But now laws are designed to proactively prevent wrongdoing "for your own good' (soda, trans-fats and salt ban for example). when you can be punished for salting your food (ok, the restaurant can be punished for making it available to you) and the power to enforce it exists there is a problem.
"ignorance of the law is no excuse" cant cut it when there are 100's of new laws passed every year concerning everything from breastfeeding to soda size. it is impossible for anyone who is not a lawyer or a computer to keep up with them. when the laws equaled do no harm to another is was fairly common sense what you could and couldn't do, but when laws now cover how much trash you are allowed to throw away, or force you to recycle saran wrap you can not possibly be expected to keep up with them all. Especially since many of the more ruinous ones are passed in conjunction with something completely separate (as an example see the high capacity mag ban tacked onto the cyber security bill). this has to stop somewhere, but how do you get it to stop? I cannot envision that the people of new york wanted this kind of all intrusive big brother esq system installed by their mayor, yet even if they vote him out the system is still there. No police department would ever give up that kind of power "for the public good", yet it always leads to abuses. Even if this department uses it with strictly good intentions,who is to say the next will. i can easily see a mayor or public official demanding it be used to track a political opponent to discredit or disqualify them. Is it that much harder to see someone using it against an ex in a bitter divorce, or to determine if someone overeats or doesn't eat enough vegetables (in the name of "public health"). If many of these crimes only carry a fine or fee, can you imagine a city not using it to generate revenue in times of cash strappedness (like say a recession or depression)?
So the city that has made it illegal to have more than 16oz's of soda, where salt and trans-fats are banned from public restaurants, and where bottlefeeding is a crime against public health (and don't even get us started on the gun laws) has instituted a 100% 24-7/365 surveillance system upon all its residents. Furthermore it plans to sell it to other locations, for a measly 30% profit (does that qualify as an obscene profit? Think the government will tax it as one?)) The city already has a history of going beyond its borders and authority in trying to proactively enforce laws (their gun shop "sting" operations, their surveillance in other cities). Does anyone not think they wont abuse this power.
forget the old line about "if your not doing anything wrong you don't have anything to worry about". when laws were about punishing someone for doing something wrong it was one thing. But now laws are designed to proactively prevent wrongdoing "for your own good' (soda, trans-fats and salt ban for example). when you can be punished for salting your food (ok, the restaurant can be punished for making it available to you) and the power to enforce it exists there is a problem.
"ignorance of the law is no excuse" cant cut it when there are 100's of new laws passed every year concerning everything from breastfeeding to soda size. it is impossible for anyone who is not a lawyer or a computer to keep up with them. when the laws equaled do no harm to another is was fairly common sense what you could and couldn't do, but when laws now cover how much trash you are allowed to throw away, or force you to recycle saran wrap you can not possibly be expected to keep up with them all. Especially since many of the more ruinous ones are passed in conjunction with something completely separate (as an example see the high capacity mag ban tacked onto the cyber security bill). this has to stop somewhere, but how do you get it to stop? I cannot envision that the people of new york wanted this kind of all intrusive big brother esq system installed by their mayor, yet even if they vote him out the system is still there. No police department would ever give up that kind of power "for the public good", yet it always leads to abuses. Even if this department uses it with strictly good intentions,who is to say the next will. i can easily see a mayor or public official demanding it be used to track a political opponent to discredit or disqualify them. Is it that much harder to see someone using it against an ex in a bitter divorce, or to determine if someone overeats or doesn't eat enough vegetables (in the name of "public health"). If many of these crimes only carry a fine or fee, can you imagine a city not using it to generate revenue in times of cash strappedness (like say a recession or depression)?
