From: jim@bilbo.suite.com (Jim Miller)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 94 15:43:34 PST
To: blancw@microsoft.com
Subject: Re: What's so bad about a Surveillance State?
Message-ID: <9403182331.AA10941@bilbo.suite.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> So did you receive/collect a goodly number of responses
> to this  question?   ~ Blanc 

> 



Not as many as I'd hoped.  And most of them said pretty much the same  
thing:

   pro:  crime would be reduced
   con:  freedom would be eliminated

My primary goal was to generate thought and discussion.  In that  
light, my original post did succeed somewhat.  However, I haven't  
received enough variety in the responses to construct a good list of  
pros.  


I think I should rephrase the question and post again.  I should not  
ask for the pros and cons of a "surveillance state", rather, I should  
ask for the pros and cons of "government sponsored surveillance  
technology/programs".

I want to get people to think about possible benifits of government  
sponsored surveillance.  Not because I like government sponsored  
surveillance, but because I feel that thinking about the technology  
from a "pro" perspective will give the "anti" (or better, the  
"indifferent") people insight into how the pro-surveillance people  
might attempt to justify the programs they advocate.

	"It is easier to defeat you enemy if you can view the 

	battlefield from their chair."

	-- somebody famous probably said something like this
	   2000 years ago

Jim_Miller@suite.com