Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

jacquesmattheij.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 321 posts

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#171

Post by aaronem »

douche wrote: post #94
sebastianconcpt wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The political cost would be too high for the oppressing side. The military will not be homogeneously obedient to repress its own people that much

That was a big issue for the North in the early years of the Civil War. Southerners were disproportionately represented in the small pre-war standing army and West Point alumnae. So the war starts, and they mostly go home and switch sides; at the same time the northern armies are massively expanding, with a gutted officer pool.

Linguistic quibble: "Alumnae" is the nominative feminine plural of the noun "alumnus", and thus refers specifically to a female graduate of some institution of higher learning, &c. In 1860, there was no such thing as an alumna of West Point, a school which at that time had only alumni (which is the nominative masculine plural, and the correct usage in this case).

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#172

Post by rorykoehler »

baddox wrote: post #162
rorykoehler wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My personal experiences in some of the cases you have mentioned. 2 times house break, both times I confronted the burglars with a kitchen knife and gave them an avenue to escape which they took. I would never want to kill someone because they tried take my property. It's just stuff and quite frankly I value human life much higher, even if it is the life of a criminal who is taking my things. The fact that there are s…

> The fact that there are so many of these situations points towards a different and bigger problem in society and I would much rather energy was spent on fixing them than treating symptoms with firearms. Of course there's a bigger problem. But I would much rather own a gun and actually be able to protect myself and my family, than refuse to have a gun on principle and just pray that one day I get to effect all of so…

The chances of being in a car crash are substantially higher than being shot. Also car crashes are rarely intended.

It's not that I don't understand the perspective you put forward, especially in the US where there is already a high prevalence of gun ownership. I do however think the importance of the right to bear arms is way overstated. It's really easy (and dare I day, liberating) to live without a gun.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#173

Post by 67726e »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #104
67726e wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or when someone breaks into your apartment and the police have an average response time of, what, 10 minutes or so? How about when you pull over to assist a crashed motorcyclist and it turns out he's a DUI-case and attempts to car-jack you? How about when you see someone waltz into your neighbors backyard and kick in the door? All things that have happened to either myself, or a coworker in the past year. Is it unrea…

Nothing like that has ever happened to me. In fact, I have never been in a situation where I would have been better off with a gun on me. Funny how people who own guns seem to end up in dangerous situations so often.

Funny part was, I didn't even own a gun for the break in or when I found the dude breaking into my neighbors house. In fact, I was lucky enough that there happened to be a cop driving by right as I ran out the door to try to grab his plate number. In the case of the carjacking, that happened to my boss when he pulled over to render assistance to a man who crashed his motorcycle. Him just trying to be a good Samaritan at 3 in the afternoon on a Sunday. After the break in I bought a rifle, and after my boss nearly got carjacked I bought a pistol and am pursuing a concealed permit. I'm not going into with a John Wayne mentality, rather I have something of a Scout's Motto mentality. Be Prepared.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#174

Post by rorykoehler »

baddox wrote: post #165
walru wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ownership of guns or a citizenry with guns does not degeneracy make. Education, or lack there of, is the ill to the mention you made. Take Switzerland. http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-...

I think that America's urban poverty and drug war are bigger factors.

It's all about poverty. All the problems discussed here are due to poverty.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#175

Post by 67726e »

tehwebguy wrote: post #151
Maken wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from starting a gun race with the burglar and fearing losing your life altogether with your possessions, I never follow this reasoning. How is it worse facing without guns a unarmed intruder than facing with a gun a well armed one?

For better or for worse that argument is facile in countries where guns are already plentiful. No one gets to choose whether their intruder will be armed.

As I said in my original response: The cat is out of the bag.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#176

Post by Spooky23 »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #104
67726e wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or when someone breaks into your apartment and the police have an average response time of, what, 10 minutes or so? How about when you pull over to assist a crashed motorcyclist and it turns out he's a DUI-case and attempts to car-jack you? How about when you see someone waltz into your neighbors backyard and kick in the door? All things that have happened to either myself, or a coworker in the past year. Is it unrea…

Nothing like that has ever happened to me. In fact, I have never been in a situation where I would have been better off with a gun on me. Funny how people who own guns seem to end up in dangerous situations so often.

That's a really ignorant statement. The problem with the gun debate is that nobody wants to walk in another's shoes.

There are many people who live in areas where police response is nonexistent for many types of crime or response times are awful. Guns are a great equalizer for the weak.

The overblown prohibition push over the years has empowered the more extreme gun advocates and created the potential for more problems.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#177

Post by steve_mcqueen »

twoodfin wrote: post #135

And if you’re not content with living in a world where all of that data is public then you’d better stop repeating that silly mantra ‘if you’ve got nothing to hide then you’ve got nothing to fear’... Serious question: Who's making this argument? I don't hear it articulated by anyone, frankly. I'm sure there are people who hold this position and have argued for it, but are any of them in a position to make policy? Hav…

Google CEO (at the time) Eric Schmidt:

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmid...

Senator Trent Lott:

"What are people worried about? What is the problem?" asked Lott, a former majority leader. "Are you doing something you're not supposed to?"

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/15/bellsouth.nsa/

Senator Lindsay Graham

"I don’t think you're talking to the terrorists. I know you're not. I know I'm not, so we don't have anything to worry about..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/06/lindsey-graham-nsa_...

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#178

Post by anon4 »

Taek wrote: post #157
rorykoehler wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't understand about the want to have freedom to bare arms (aside from moral arguments about what high levels of gun ownership does to society, but let's not go there) is that the only time I can imagine needing a gun in life is during a time of civil war or some similar sort of uprising. It would not make any difference to me what the law was in this regard if lawlessness had already broken out and I feared…

The original right to bear arms is about being able to stand up to an oppressive government. It's not something you are supposed to need in daily life, it's something you are supposed to need when your government decides that tax rates are 85%, curfew is 8pm, all electronic communication is banned, and any soldier is allowed to live in your home and rape any civilian. The right to bear arms is ideally one you never n…

That sounds a bit odd. If you're standing up to the government, why would the laws matter to you. Or is it a bit like "Here's a gun, if we ever go too bad, shoot us". Which in turn raises the question why has no-one massacred Wall Street yet.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#179

Post by DanBC »

Spooky23 wrote: post #176
lern_too_spel wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing like that has ever happened to me. In fact, I have never been in a situation where I would have been better off with a gun on me. Funny how people who own guns seem to end up in dangerous situations so often.

That's a really ignorant statement. The problem with the gun debate is that nobody wants to walk in another's shoes. There are many people who live in areas where police response is nonexistent for many types of crime or response times are awful. Guns are a great equalizer for the weak. The overblown prohibition push over the years has empowered the more extreme gun advocates and created the potential for more proble…

I had a man break into my home when I was there. He got in through the roof, going up scaffolding on a derelict building next door.

I offered him a cup of tea, and told him it would probably be safer for him to leave via my front door and down the stairs rather than back down the scaffolding. He declined the tea, but I went and made one for myself and called the police. He went back out the way he'd come in. The police caught him in the garden, where he brandished a bottle at them. They did not shoot and kill him[1], they de-escalated then caught and cuffed him. He served a short sentence, got some drug and alcohol rehab, and is now only engaged in minor crime.

At no point did I think "this would be better if any of us (me, him, the police) could have a gun".

[1] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/armed-police-...

Armed Police in England and Wales only fired their weapons twice out of 14684 operations in 2013/2014.

And let's not forget that the UK has terrorist and paramilitary groups operating here.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#180

Post by lwhalen »

anon4 wrote: post #178
Taek wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original right to bear arms is about being able to stand up to an oppressive government. It's not something you are supposed to need in daily life, it's something you are supposed to need when your government decides that tax rates are 85%, curfew is 8pm, all electronic communication is banned, and any soldier is allowed to live in your home and rape any civilian. The right to bear arms is ideally one you never n…

That sounds a bit odd. If you're standing up to the government, why would the laws matter to you. Or is it a bit like "Here's a gun, if we ever go too bad, shoot us". Which in turn raises the question why has no-one massacred Wall Street yet.

Wall Street are, ostensibly, private citizens doing their private jobs, not elected officials who are supposed to be acting in the public's best interest.
Post reply on HN