John Gilmore interviewed by Greplaw 164
mpawlo writes "I have just published another one of those Greplaw interviews. This time, John Gilmore had the courtesy of answering a wide range of questions on various subjects such as terrorism and security, spam blocking, censorship, secret laws in airports and of course - sarongs. Gilmore starts: 'I'm a civil libertarian millionaire eccentric.' Enjoy!"
"I'm a civil libertarian millionaire eccentric" (Score:5, Funny)
greplaw? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Gilmore?? (Score:1, Funny)
Re:"I'm a civil libertarian millionaire eccentric" (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Rights (Score:5, Funny)
Obviously you're not thinking this through. With the current banning of thongs in two major states the resulting surplus will no doubt follow the third fundamental law of fashion: "Anything deemed unwearable by the religious right will surface within two weeks in San Francisco like a tidal wave."
Given the concentration of techies in the Bay Area, I'd say we have something to look forward to.
Re:Deadhead (Score:1, Funny)
We're out here. Just thought you might like to know.
Re:Judge Kafka? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:And I thought I was alone... (Score:5, Funny)
So it is the right of some drunk driver to mow down a pedestrian and be able to get away with it because in the name of civil liberties, he shouldn't have to have a license plate and drivers license eh?
I have absolutely no idea how to respond to that. Perhaps I need to beat myself over the head with a blunt object to approach that level of thinking and interpretation. You might as well say "So it is the right of some mentally-unbalanced gun nut to mow down a pedestrian and be able to get away with it because in the name of civil liberties, he shouldn't have to have a license to own the gun eh?"
The license had nothing to do with the fact that the guy was ACTING IRRESPONSIBLY. You act like that magic piece of plastic is going to automatically make Daryl the Drunk into Reginald the Responsible. Do you know why people as a whole drive safely? They don't want to damage their property and/or go to jail. The truly good people don't want to hurt other people. You act like the fact that a guy spent a few hours in a line at the DMV should account for his driving skill.
I'm all for much tougher penalties for irresponsible driving practices. Drunken driving should be a felony with at least 30 days in the drunk tank. Repeat offenders should be locked up even longer (presuming we let them out, which we shouldn't). If someone demonstrates a lack of ability to handle liberty, by all means TAKE IT AWAY.
You, sir, are an idiot. There, I said what everyone was thinking. You took my opposition to prior restraint and someone managed to walk away with an advocation of reckless and dangerous behaviour. I don't know what your problem is, but I'd bet it's hard to pronounce.
Yes I agree that big brother should be kept out of your living room, but when you are on the road, you can very easily affect another citizen's right to "life, liberty and the persuit of happiness". This is what pisses me off most about these, "I can do whatever the fuck I feel like" civil libertarians, what you do can adversely affect other people.
Can. That's a really sticky word, isn't it? I *can* choose to shoot a bunch of children with my gun. Should I be automatically subjected to intense psychological evaluation before I can own that gun? Prior restraint goes against everything this country has ever stood for. You cannot in any free society punish the innocent for the crimes of the guilty.
Do people do bad things? Yeah, it happens. But if you go off the deep end trying to prevent bad things from happening, you might as well lock everyone into their own little padded room in restraints so they can't hurt themselves. (Yes, this is hyperbole. That's the point.)
This is coming from someone who is a stron supporter of the ACLU(I would be a member, but I am a cheap bastard)
That's a good thing that you aren't a member, because with your attitudes I'd doubt they'd have you.
It's obvious to me you lost someone to a drunk driver, and I'm sorry about your loss. However, your emotional problems with that should not end up being the basis of law. By taking away someone's ability to chose, you become a petty tyrant as bad as King George III and an enemy to liberty.
God gave me the right to choose, and I'll never give up that God-given right of agency and free choice. Don't try taking that away.
Re:A wise man... (Score:1, Funny)
John F. Kennedy
Martin Luther King
Mohandas K. Gandhi
Jesus Christ