<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: From Christian -- Re: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Meta: Strawman - Process vs. Policy
- To: CCurtis79@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: From Christian -- Re: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Meta: Strawman - Process vs. Policy
- From: Joe St Sauver <joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 14:55:39 -0700
Christian mentioned:
#We've been asked to address the question of criminal conduct here. To
#some degree, law enforcement agencies are applying pressure on us to do
#their jobs with the assertion that we're the only ones who can. I'm
#really not comfortable taking that role.
More accurately, they're NOT asking anyone to take on their role, and in
fact, I haven't heard ANY law enforcment agency ask ICANN for anything.
Or *has* that occurred? If so, I'd love to know more. Was it Interpol? The
FBI? The anti-carding branch of the US Secret Service? A civil regulatory
agency such as the FTC? The Surete?
# Part of the inefficiencies inherent to law enforcement are there to
#preserve justice and individual liberties.
That's a position I've NOT heard previously advanced. I've always heard
things like a "right to a speedy trial" as the objective, and if I get
pulled over for speeding, I sure don't want to languish by the side of
the road or have to spend time in jail awaiting processing, I just want
to take my ticket and go on my way.
I would also note that inefficiencies mean that more law enforcement
officers would be needed to do the same amount of work, and as a fiscal
and political conservative, I have no desire to see money wasted in
the creation of (what should be) unnecessary positions.
Friction in the operation of government doesn't protect liberties, it
just represents wasted resources and gives the bad guys and bad gals a
hand up. I can't believe any of us would really want that.
Regards,
Joe
Disclaimer: all opinions strictly my own.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|