Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Government The Internet Your Rights Online

Law Enforcement Still Wants Mandatory ISP Log Retention 226

Posted by Soulskill
from the they-know-how-often-you-google-bieber dept.
schwit1 writes with this snippet from CNet: "Law enforcement representatives are planning to endorse a proposed federal law that would require Internet service providers to store logs about their customers for 18 months. ... Michael Brown, sheriff in Bedford County, Va., and a board member and executive committee member of the National Sheriffs' Association, is planning to argue that a new law is necessary because Internet providers do not store customer records long enough. 'The limited data retention time and lack of uniformity among retention from company to company significantly hinders law enforcement's ability to identify predators when they come across child pornography,' according to a copy of Brown's remarks. Any stored logs could, however, be used to prosecute any type of crime."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Law Enforcement Still Wants Mandatory ISP Log Retention

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @07:09PM (#36742328)

    Why don't they mandate the city keep garbage for 6 months, so it can be used to prosecute poeple?

  • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @07:42PM (#36742774) Journal
    In the words of the great Jello Biafra:

    "Want to see child porn? Join the Vice Squad."
  • by interkin3tic (1469267) on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @08:16PM (#36743128)

    Every time there is a push to reduce our privacy rights online, it's ALWAYS in the guise of child pornography. I mean seriously, how serious of a problem is it? Why does law enforcement need to know I go to slashdot.com daily or watch porn every other day? Why don't they just store data for child pornography sites?

    See, I would phrase that as "So law enforcement is saying they are incompetent and utter failures at actually preventing children from being exploited in the production of child porn?" or "Why isn't law enforcement going after the source of this scourge?" or "Is Michael Brown, sheriff in Bedford County, Va., and a board member and executive committee member of the National Sheriffs' Association turning a blind eye to the production of child porn?"

    Not because it's true, or those questions are at all logical, but because you need to fight fire with fire. Seriously. Someone should write an opinion piece and go on Fox news and say "By taking this route, Michael Brown, sheriff in Bedford County, Va., and a board member and executive committee member of the National Sheriffs' Association is essentially giving up on child molesters. This government intrusion into internet providers' business does nothing to stop children from being sexually exploited. It is his job to stop children from being sexually exploited, not tell small businesses how to to run themselves. This will only increase internet fees and cost American jobs, and will do nothing to stop child molesters from murdering your children."

    Maybe tighten that up a little. It's a fine line between the type of crazy that those people believe and the type of crazy that even those people realize is crazy.

"Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company." -- Mark Twain

Working...