, 2005-02-08
Why a Supreme Court decision on canine-assisted roadside searches opens the door to a new regime of Internet surveillance.
Expand all |
Post comment
Logic a bit flawed
2005-02-08
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs
2005-02-08
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs
2005-02-09
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
On Unreasonable Searches
2005-02-09
Mark Rasch (7 replies)
Mark Rasch (7 replies)
Analysis Flaw Revised
2005-02-10
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs
2005-02-10
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)

By its nature, unlawful activity cannot claim protection of the law for itself. The point behind political rights (as opposed to natural rights) that appear to protect something unlawful is that they are in fact protecting something else, something that is lawful and would be put at risk if the unlawful thing were not also shielded.
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/297/30539#30539