Exposing home addresses and wife is uncool. Leave the home and family out of it.
I don't know why they didn't just pass it over to WikiLeaks. They've been through that problem already, and have a process in place to delete that sort of stuff.
LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
31–40 of 210 posts
Re: LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing you've never been in a car when a cop plays the "I smell pot Joe. What do think?" game. Police officers do have a sworn duty. But some of them do not uphold their oaths. Some of them even break the law outright. It's therefore quite possible to have an issue with law enforcement, separate from the laws themselves.
Some cops are crooked so screw them all? This happens in every profession, not just law enforcement. Edit, to the poster below: There have been many cases where a man and women have sex and the woman later claims she was raped. Try to find a case of word vs. word (no other evidence) and the man was found not guilty. Now, try to find the opposite.
> "Some cops are crooked so screw them all?"
Not all cops are crooked - but the Blue Code of Silence puts the culpability for the crooked cops' crimes squarely on the police force as a whole. If the police forces of the US even showed some inclination of willingness to police the actions of their own, then we wouldn't have most of these problems.
Here in Seattle we've had an unprovoked shooting of a homeless man, to which the officer involved was allowed to resign gracefully, despite all parties agreeing that the was no provocation nor justification. Another officer body-slammed an innocent man (without warning, provocation, or identifying himself) into a wall so hard he is now in a vegetative state. This man remains on the force. Similarly, another officer was caught on store surveillance taking his rage out on a teenager in a convenience store, stomping on his face, after a failed drug bust next door. That officer remains on the force also.
Not all cops do these things, but they are all guilty of covering up these acts and ensuring that, even if they do get out to the public, that no real consequences occur for the officers involved.
I will have zero trust for any police force until they have proven their ability and willingness to police themselves.
> "Try to find a case of word vs. word (no other evidence) and the man was found not guilty. Now, try to find the opposite"
Huh, could've sworn I typed in "news.ycombinator.com" not "reddit.com/r/mensrights"
Re: LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing you've never been in a car when a cop plays the "I smell pot Joe. What do think?" game. Police officers do have a sworn duty. But some of them do not uphold their oaths. Some of them even break the law outright. It's therefore quite possible to have an issue with law enforcement, separate from the laws themselves.
Some cops are crooked so screw them all? This happens in every profession, not just law enforcement. Edit, to the poster below: There have been many cases where a man and women have sex and the woman later claims she was raped. Try to find a case of word vs. word (no other evidence) and the man was found not guilty. Now, try to find the opposite.
I don't live in the USA, but in my country normally when a cop is being abusive of the authority granted to him he has a few layers of command above him that tolerate, and sometimes even encourage, such behaviour. I believe this is usually the norm and not an exception particular to my hometown.
Re: LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
#34Before anyone says, "Why harass these people? They're just trying to make a living." Think about it for a little while.
There's nothing noble about lulzsec. If someone rampaged through a neighborhood lock picking or crowbaring doors open and dumping the contents on the street out of some misguided sense of raising awareness about security how would people view them? Why should we view lulzsec any different?
Well, if the victims were planning to ethnically cleanse said neighborhood that would in fact shade the issue differently
Noble isn't the word I would use by a longshot..in fact I think lulzsec is pretty stupid. but I'm also not going to go out of my way to defend a corrupt institution that happens to have the law on their side
Re: LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
#35Anything that embarrasses Joe Arapio, in any way at all, is good news to me.
Re: LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
#36Anything that embarrasses Joe Arapio, in any way at all, is good news to me.
Arizona DPS and the Maricopa Country Sheriff's Office are two completely separate departments that basically don't interact with one another.
It would be like targeting hacker news because reddit made you mad.
Re: LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
#37Exposing home addresses and wife is uncool. Leave the home and family out of it.
I think their new goal is to make as many enemies as is possible. It seems like they will not stop until every person on the planet wants them dead.
Re: LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
#38Exposing home addresses and wife is uncool. Leave the home and family out of it.
I don't know why they didn't just pass it over to WikiLeaks. They've been through that problem already, and have a process in place to delete that sort of stuff.
Lulzsec has had a history of defending WL (PBS hack for Bradley Manning), but I don't know if they are willing to give them this data as it might shine the spotlight away from Lulzsec.
Re: LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can't uphold the law as a cop you would lose your job. Laws don't just magically appear, right? By the time they pass as a law the cop is just doing their job. We didn't do our job as voters and the correct action now is to "take it up with your legislator".
> "If you can't uphold the law as a cop you would lose your job." Your responsibility to humanity ( particularly as an officer of the law) trumps your right to be fed. Also, the world at large has upheld, many times over, that "following orders" is not a sufficient defense. "But I have a mortgage" - the new and improved Nuremberg Defense (with apologies to Thank You For Smoking). Hell, the people who relied on the Nu…
You're wrong on this (or at very least looking at the issue without nuance). More often than not "just following orders" IS a sufficient defense. Only in the most heinous of acts is it considered insufficient (if that weren't the case there'd be no reason to define what is and is not a "war crime")
Deporting someone, even if you feel it's unjustified, is a far cry from a War Crime.
That's the cogent point. The danger in an officer choosing to enforce the law as he or she sees fit is so great that they aren't excused in doing so unless the act is an atrocity. Because once an officer is selectively enforcing the law they actually become the one making the law.
Since officers of the law aren't elected that's unacceptable.
Re: LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
#40There's certainly a bunch of interesting stuff in there, like how officers are instructed to place iPhone in nickel or copper plated containers in order to prevent remote wipes and a ton of information about gangs and smuggling.
There's also other cool technical stuff in there, like how they gather digital evidence, information about hacker forums like ryan1918.com that have information on FBI honeypots and a book on how to "crack leetspeak".
Unlike the other releases by LulzSec, this looks like it actually is an useful, WikiLeaks-style release (except they haven't filtered out any private or irrelevant information like Wikileaks tries to do)