Live data from Hacker News

FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

thehill.com

301–310 of 417 posts

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be right, but I'm not convinced. > and mostly it is redundant with other sources The main means of communication other than face-to-face is telephone calls and this newfangled web with its many features. Both are provided by a modern smart phone, which most people seem to live through. Therefore you can expect most to all non-F2F comms to go through the phone (typically; not necessarily). So I can't accept wh…

Normal phone calls are logged by telephone companies, emails can be acquired from most providers, Google and other ad companies will have a pretty detailed history of general web use. In short, your phone does almost nothing without some server recording it. > I care greatly about privacy but when there is legal cause as people have died, my feelings are the law must have access. You can't have both, if there is a ba…

> You can't have [a backdoor] both [ways]

Agreed. In another post I said the same thing. That's why I'm against backdoors. If the cops want to access someone's account just because, well they can make sweet luuurve to themselves with an pineapple.

If that person has done murdered a handful of people I want the cops to get access, strictly permitted by a legal, independent entity that people can feel they can trust, as far as is possible. I'm trying to get a conversation going as to how that can be done, if even possible. It's not going well!

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#303
post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they still wont comply after one year, mass incarceration is an option. Alternatively people could be executed on sight. Surely this is in jest?

It will be only slightly bloodier than current mass shootings, and not upon innocent (but on people breaking the law by having guns) at that!

And it has an added benefit of a more pliable populace as the riffraff were forcibly removed and the remmnants are scarred and scared or simply overjoyed at finally arriving at the "no guns for lil people nirvana".

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#304
post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trouble with those policies (aside from 100-round barrels... I have no idea what that means, and I don’t think you do either) is that they’re often-mentioned, but people forget to ask the question, “Have these policies actually improved anything where they’ve been implemented?” Many of the recently-publicized shootings in the US have occurred in California, which has some of the most strict firearms laws in the n…

> Many of the recently-publicized shootings in the US have occurred in California, which has some of the most strict firearms laws in the nation. How many of those had an out of state purchase like the most recent one though (Gilroy)?

It can be also out of country purchases: go to Canada, buy the gun, come back. The situation is not different in any way, especially because if you buy the gun in Vermont or Canada you are still not allowed to get it in California. Do you want to regulate guns in Canada?

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#305
post #240
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is more appropriate to refer to them as his brother https://www.out.com/news/2019/8/08/dayton-shooters-slain-bro...

I see this a lot. People who are known to be trans in the wider LGBTQ+ community die, then their family deadnames them to the press, and people come out of the woodworks to defend the family and the press while ignoring the wishes of the person who died. Sometimes, like in this case, it's complicated because they're only out to a few people. I would still rather err on the side of what close friends say rather than f…

I have no knowledge here, but it seems like you're saying that journalists should out people who aren't out to their families? Doing that without having clear evidence of the person's intent seems it might be an invasion of privacy?

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#306
This is maybe the only response to a heinous act like a mass shooting that is more despicable and pathetic than wrapping an event like this around a politically charged baseball bat.

More so than even using this event to claim that "guns are the problem" or the sole factor in this issue.

We all know the FBI can access the information on this phone, they're just playing into the hands of emotional trauma and emotionally driven people who are ill informed to de-value the perceived sanctity of privacy and data security...

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100 round barrels?

Yes, 20 round barrels can just kill like 5-6 people, 10-12 if you're lucky and it's a dense crowd, so they're ok /s

There is nothing like a 20 round barrel, the most barrels in an gun is around 7 or 8 on platform mounts and the weight it in thousands of pounds. A barrel is not a unit of measure for rounds. Learn something about what you want to discuss if you want to have any valid point, being clueless and talking is not a good idea.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#308
post #38

“ultimately measured in a mounting number of victims — men, women and children who are the victims of crimes, crimes that could have been prevented if law enforcement had been given lawful access to encrypted evidence," I don't understand this. How would getting into his phone post facto stop the shooting? Do they have a time machine?

Just a fun sidenote.

I've been watching the count of up/down votes.

Folks are actually downvoting my comment; please carry on. But why I'm the hell do you want the government to be able to have unwarranted access to your devices?

Previously any letter you sent was not copied,read and stored in a searchable format by the FBI/via/nsa. Maybe if you were targeted but not wholesale dragnet. Now it is and even more accessibility is being asked. This is a kgb dream machine.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#309
post #49

> Attorney General William Barr said in a speech last month that encrypted messaging services allow "criminals to operate with impunity." The cost of encryption is “ultimately measured in a mounting number of victims — men, women and children who are the victims of crimes, crimes that could have been prevented if law enforcement had been given lawful access to encrypted evidence," This disgraceful, emotionally manipu…

And it's crystal clear and obvious in this case that it doesn't matter. The man shot a bunch of people, and was subsequently killed to stop his slaughter. There is no doubt to his guilt. There is no case to build. While the public may wish to know more about the shooters motives, that's not something the public or any law enforcement agency needs to keep people safe.

This seems over-confident. Other people might have been involved. If so, there could be a case to build. Hard to say without investigating?

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trouble with those policies (aside from 100-round barrels... I have no idea what that means, and I don’t think you do either) is that they’re often-mentioned, but people forget to ask the question, “Have these policies actually improved anything where they’ve been implemented?” Many of the recently-publicized shootings in the US have occurred in California, which has some of the most strict firearms laws in the n…

> Why guns are the hot-button issue and heart disease isn’t plastered over the media 24/7? Heart disease does get public attention -- check your breakfast cereal, as a banal example: odds are it touts its "heart healthiness" -- and gun control isn't 24/7 either. But there are a few components to consider. One is that gun deaths are traumatic beyond the impact of just the death. The murder of someone you love, where a…

> "Gun deaths are traumatic beyond the impact of just the death."

I don't think you've ever lost a loved one. If you had, you'd understand that what you're saying is completely bonkers and is extremely insulting to those of us who have lost loved ones.

Post reply on HN