There’s been a recent attempt to rebadge the ongoing war against encryption as a war on terrorism, but few people realize that there’s a backlog of cases in which prosecutors are drooling over access to encrypted iPhones.
[Manhattan district attorney Cyrus ] Vance told Rose he had 175 iPhones waiting for the outcome of this case.
I’m sure there will be a lot more than that.
But as they say, it’s about the terrorists in San Bernardino. Right?
I’ve long been fascinated by a phenomenon called “mission creep.” Laws are passed or exceptions are made to enable going after terrorists, and they end up being used against accused drug dealers, “money launderers” (meaning people who have a lot of cash), people accused of “piracy” (meaning the sharing of digital information), or anyone accused of any crime.
Some of the things that are felonies amaze me. I think they would have amazed Orwell.
Did you know that in Michigan (and probably in many other states), it is actually a crime to possess too many cigarettes, or too much tobacco?
(3) A person who possesses, acquires, transports, or offers for sale contrary to this act 3,000 or more cigarettes, tobacco products other than cigarettes with an aggregate wholesale price of $250.00 or more, 3,000 or more counterfeit cigarettes, 3,000 or more counterfeit cigarette papers, 3,000 or more gray market cigarettes, or 3,000 or more gray market cigarette papers is guilty of a felony, punishable by a fine of not more than $50,000.00 or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both.
3000 cigarettes is 15 cartons. So, if for whatever reason I might decide tobacco is worth hoarding (or storing as gifts for smoker friends), and I run around and buy cartons, at the point I buy too many, I become a felon.
I’d think it was funny if it weren’t so sick. A legal product becomes illegal in larger quantities, simply because the ruling class thinks that such a law will make it easier to nab black market cigarette dealers. Like banning guns or cell phones because some people use them to commit crimes.
Then I read about so-called “computer porn dogs.” I wondered, how could a dog be trained to actually smell computer porn (as opposed to any other form of digital data)?
It turns out that they can’t. The hysteria headlines are designed to mislead the stupid people into thinking that dogs have some magic abilities they do not have. What dogs can do, however, is smell storage devices. Like these:
Look at the picture very carefully, because that is what government prosecutors and their pliant media operatives are trying (with a straight face) to maintain is evidence of crime. Never mind that there are few homes in America that don’t have the above devices.
What matters is that we are all criminal suspects. What matters is that dogs can be trained to smell the above “devices” in any of our homes, and that these “devices” are “commonly used by perpetrators.”
I’d hate this country if I actually thought that its rulers and their media sycophants actually were the country.
But I’m glad they’re not.
Comments
7 responses to “The ongoing criminalization of almost everything”
The FBI has a court order. Apple is free to appeal it (which they are), but they are not free to ignore the courts. If the order is upheld, Cook et al will either submit, or they will go to jail until they do. That is what is called the rule of law. What you are supporting is anarchy.
Paterico explained the whole situation several days ago. Go read his blog.
I would venture that when almost everything is illegal, the result is anarchy.
Those who support enforcing tyrannical laws are the reason heavily armed SWAT Teams are deployed to arrest people allegedly involved in nonviolent transactions to which the parties consent.
As to the iPhone, the government doesn’t just want the information on the terrorists’ phone. They want to be able to get into yours and mine.
http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafee-ill-decrypt-san-bernardino-phone-for-free-2016-2
Minor note on the Tobacco thing.
We have to read laws closely, and investigate their references.
It does not say “A person who possesses, acquires, transports, or offers for sale” – it says “A person who possesses, acquires, transports, or offers for sale contrary to this act“.
S. 205.428 is the penalties section, and does not define which possession is “contrary to this act”.
S. 205.423 is more relevant, and prohibits people selling or warehousing or transporting [etc.] without a permit, not mere possession.
S. 205 in general does not seem to place any limits on personal possession of tobacco products, just commercial activity, which is far less onerous on personal liberty; it is, after all, a tobacco products tax act – personal retail use and possession has already paid tax and the State could not possibly care less.
(And above, transporting means transporting as part of wholesale sales or warehousing, note.
Not transporting the end-use product after retail sale.)
If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. I was told this by conservatives during the vietnam war when we complained about the cointel program. You had know problem with violation of the civil rights of anti-iraq war protestors or american muslims. when you so the wind don’t complain about reaping the whirlwind. USA! USA! USA! as the trump supporters say.
[…] the risk of sounding like an anarchist, it has long struck me that respect for authority and contempt for authority are a […]
Anarcho-tyranny.