GCSB Protest March

Forums › Off topic › GCSB Protest March

1 | ... | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | ... | 48

8218 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#868497 30-Jul-2013 13:30

Klipspringer:

Your so called law enforcement is not working

It's working fine. He and his cronies were convicted on charges that could be, you know, proven. And if the police seriously believe he is a real threat to the community then they can get a warrant to spy on him and then use that evidence against him.

As much I agree with you that he's a nut job, I also have to agree with KiwiNZ that there really doesn't appear to be a case for him to be a particular danger to society. You can be sure the police are keeping tabs on him though - if he starts looking serious I imagine they'll make sure to get it right next time. These 'technicalities' are there for a reason - they stop innocent people being sent to prison.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#868500 30-Jul-2013 13:35

Something interesting I saw in Wikipedia

Homegrown or imported terrorism is not new to the United States or Europe. The United States has uncovered a number of alleged terrorist plots that have been successfully suppressed through domestic intelligence and law enforcement. The United States has begun to account for the threat of homegrown terrorism, as shown by increased volume of literature on the subject in recent years and increased number of terrorist websites since Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, began posting beheading videos in 2003. A July 2009 document by the FBI estimated that there were roughly 15,000 websites and web forums that support terrorist activities, with around 10,000 of them actively maintained. 80% of these sites are on U.S.-based servers.

Whats the general geekzone viewpoint on this?

Lets just say for a minute, there were a lot of active terrorist type websites right here in New Zealand. On New Zealand based servers.

We had one terror attack right here in Wellington. A few people were blown up in lambton Quay. New Zealad based websites are buzzing with information and possible plots for the next possible bombing.

In a time like this. What more important? Personal online privacy? Or flushing out these terrorist operations?

SaltyNZ

8218 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#868506 30-Jul-2013 13:39

Klipspringer: Something interesting I saw in Wikipedia

Homegrown or imported terrorism is not new to the United States or Europe. The United States has uncovered a number of alleged terrorist plots that have been successfully suppressed through domestic intelligence and law enforcement. The United States has begun to account for the threat of homegrown terrorism, as shown by increased volume of literature on the subject in recent years and increased number of terrorist websites since Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, began posting beheading videos in 2003. A July 2009 document by the FBI estimated that there were roughly 15,000 websites and web forums that support terrorist activities, with around 10,000 of them actively maintained. 80% of these sites are on U.S.-based servers.

Whats the general geekzone viewpoint on this?

Lets just say for a minute, there were a lot of active terrorist type websites right here in New Zealand. On New Zealand based servers.

We had one terror attack right here in Wellington. A few people were blown up in lambton Quay. New Zealad based websites are buzzing with information and possible plots for the next possible bombing.

In a time like this. What more important? Personal online privacy? Or flushing out these terrorist operations?

Well if all the web sites were buzzing and some idiot still managed to blow up Lambton Quay after posting about it on Facebook, then blanket surveillance failed again, just like every other time.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#868512 30-Jul-2013 13:41

SaltyNZ:

As much I agree with you that he's a nut job, I also have to agree with KiwiNZ that there really doesn't appear to be a case for him to be a particular danger to society. You can be sure the police are keeping tabs on him though - if he starts looking serious I imagine they'll make sure to get it right next time. These 'technicalities' are there for a reason - they stop innocent people being sent to prison.

Interesting point, "technicalities are there for a reason"

In this case, lets say there was substantial evidence available proving him guilty. But that evidence was obtained illegally and therefore not used.

Does that mean he is innocent?

Do you feel its right that the illegally obtained evidence is not used?

Surely evidence is evidence. No matter how obtained? Surely then illegally obtained evidence proving one "not guilty" should also not be used?

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#868514 30-Jul-2013 13:47

SaltyNZ:
Well if all the web sites were buzzing and some idiot still managed to blow up Lambton Quay after posting about it on Facebook, then blanket surveillance failed again, just like every other time.

That blanket surveillance would not have worked.

As ajobbins mentioned earlier. Government has the power and authority to monitor international communications and threats.

There is no power or authority to monitor threats coming from inside NZ.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#868519 30-Jul-2013 13:56

If websites were "buzzing" with evidence of an attack and it was not picked up on I don't believe anymore powers would have resulted in a different outcome, incompetence multiplied many times is still incompetence. The GCSB has shown it has plenty of that.

As for post attack, the Government already has powers to make executive decisions and declare a state of emergency etc.

SaltyNZ

8218 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#868521 30-Jul-2013 13:57

Klipspringer:

Do you feel its right that the illegally obtained evidence is not used?

There are many reasons why illegally obtained evidence cannot be used, and the rules have been refined over literal centuries to balance the interests of society in the apprehension of criminals with the interests of innocent individuals not to have their persons or properties forcibly invaded. Firstly, having very strict rules around what evidence may be used helps to ensure that the evidence is not tainted. Illegal evidence is much easier to falsify or plant, or accidentally damage or contaminate. False or otherwise bad evidence is much more likely to be detected when very strict rules are followed.

Secondly, the collection of evidence in many cases involves the use of state-sanctioned force against the suspect and/or their property. For example, police with a warrant can break into your house, mess it up, and arrest you if you resist them for doing so. If there were no penalties against improper collection of evidence then police who didn't like you could break into your house at will, mess up you and your stuff, and then leave after 'unfortunately' not finding anything. Damage already done, even if you are completely innocent.

But there are serious penalties for police who do that, and that protects you from them.

We are very lucky in this country that we can trust our police. But they are people just like everyone else, and that is why we have rules in place to limit their powers.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#868526 30-Jul-2013 14:02

Klipspringer:
SaltyNZ:

As much I agree with you that he's a nut job, I also have to agree with KiwiNZ that there really doesn't appear to be a case for him to be a particular danger to society. You can be sure the police are keeping tabs on him though - if he starts looking serious I imagine they'll make sure to get it right next time. These 'technicalities' are there for a reason - they stop innocent people being sent to prison.

Interesting point, "technicalities are there for a reason"

In this case, lets say there was substantial evidence available proving him guilty. But that evidence was obtained illegally and therefore not used.

Does that mean he is innocent?

Do you feel its right that the illegally obtained evidence is not used?

Surely evidence is evidence. No matter how obtained? Surely then illegally obtained evidence proving one "not guilty" should also not be used?

Enforcement agencies know the rules of evidence, these rules are not secret therefore, there is no excuse for them gaining and trying to use evidence they have obtained illegally.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#868529 30-Jul-2013 14:04

SaltyNZ:
Klipspringer:

Do you feel its right that the illegally obtained evidence is not used?

There are many reasons why illegally obtained evidence cannot be used, and the rules have been refined over literal centuries to balance the interests of society in the apprehension of criminals with the interests of innocent individuals not to have their persons or properties forcibly invaded. Firstly, having very strict rules around what evidence may be used helps to ensure that the evidence is not tainted. Illegal evidence is much easier to falsify or plant, or accidentally damage or contaminate. False or otherwise bad evidence is much more likely to be detected when very strict rules are followed.

Secondly, the collection of evidence in many cases involves the use of state-sanctioned force against the suspect and/or their property. For example, police with a warrant can break into your house, mess it up, and arrest you if you resist them for doing so. If there were no penalties against improper collection of evidence then police who didn't like you could break into your house at will, mess up you and your stuff, and then leave after 'unfortunately' not finding anything. Damage already done, even if you are completely innocent.

But there are serious penalties for police who do that, and that protects you from them.

We are very lucky in this country that we can trust our police. But they are people just like everyone else, and that is why we have rules in place to limit their powers.

Granted and I agree 100% with you.

Just interested though on your answer. Do you feel its right the illegally obtained evidence is not used? Yes/No?

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#868534 30-Jul-2013 14:08

Klipspringer: Something interesting I saw in Wikipedia

Homegrown or imported terrorism is not new to the United States or Europe. The United States has uncovered a number of alleged terrorist plots that have been successfully suppressed through domestic intelligence and law enforcement. The United States has begun to account for the threat of homegrown terrorism, as shown by increased volume of literature on the subject in recent years and increased number of terrorist websites since Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, began posting beheading videos in 2003. A July 2009 document by the FBI estimated that there were roughly 15,000 websites and web forums that support terrorist activities, with around 10,000 of them actively maintained. 80% of these sites are on U.S.-based servers.

Whats the general geekzone viewpoint on this?

Lets just say for a minute, there were a lot of active terrorist type websites right here in New Zealand. On New Zealand based servers.

We had one terror attack right here in Wellington. A few people were blown up in lambton Quay. New Zealad based websites are buzzing with information and possible plots for the next possible bombing.

In a time like this. What more important? Personal online privacy? Or flushing out these terrorist operations?

Privacy is more important. Should we take bloodsamples from EVERYONE everytime they drive a car "just in case". The best way to avoid terrorism is to stop launching missiles at them . Besides do you think a terrorist is going to use an unencrypted connection. ? Which is john keys solution for business communication. The states had sandy hook and boston . Despite 8 years of my, yours and everyone elses emails chats searches etc. Clearly it didnt help. Its ridiculous.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#868549 30-Jul-2013 14:10

Reinforces my comment regarding incompetence

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8981153/Phone-records-given-to-inquiry

These guys are too stupid to be given more power

SaltyNZ

8218 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#868553 30-Jul-2013 14:16

Klipspringer:

Just interested though on your answer. Do you feel its right the illegally obtained evidence is not used? Yes/No?

Yes, I feel that it is right that illegally obtained evidence should not be used.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#868555 30-Jul-2013 14:18

SaltyNZ:
Klipspringer:

Just interested though on your answer. Do you feel its right the illegally obtained evidence is not used? Yes/No?

Yes, I feel that it is right that illegally obtained evidence should not be used.

Even to prove innocence?

SaltyNZ

8218 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#868556 30-Jul-2013 14:21

Klipspringer:
SaltyNZ:
Klipspringer:

Just interested though on your answer. Do you feel its right the illegally obtained evidence is not used? Yes/No?

Yes, I feel that it is right that illegally obtained evidence should not be used.

Even to prove innocence?

You don't need to prove that you're innocent. The prosecutor needs to prove that you're guilty. You can use whatever evidence you like; it's only the prosecution who are bound to use only legally gathered evidence.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#868562 30-Jul-2013 14:28

Klipspringer: But you seem to forget that there are terrorists right here inside New Zealand which we can do nothing about (home grown terrorism) Read back a few pages. Tami Iti and his cronies.

You didn't say domestic terrorism, or even just terrorism. You specifically said international terrorism hence my comment.

Home grown terrorism is one of the biggest threats to America. Boston Marathon Bombings probably the most recent example.

And how well did their 'intelligence' serve them then? How much freedom do you have to give away for 'protection' from the 'bad guys'. And what happens when someone decides you are the 'bad guy'?

Given a bunch of your private information, a bit of time and someone who knows what they are doing I am sure you could make even the most law abiding, good intended citizen look like a master criminal.

Better still if you can remove access to it for every one buy yourself, and then selectively use it as evidence as and where you see fit (even if out of context). Basically what is happening to Kim Dotcom right now.

Twitter: ajobbins

1 | ... | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | ... | 48