From: Blanc Weber <blancw@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 13:33:45 +0800
To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: RE: Violation or Protection? [OLYMPICS]
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=msft%l=RED-81-MSG-960801025148Z-27607@inet-01-imc.itg.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>From: 	tcmay@got.net
>
>Of course, which is why stores can have "bags will be searched" policies,
>restrictions about atire, and all sorts of other policies which are not
>allowed in public places.
>
>Disneyland is a private park, and has rules which are not the rules a
>public park can have.
>
>Put it this way, "My house, my rules."
......................................................

"My company, or my country/government?" 

This is like kids trying to decide which parent's admonitions to heed.

There is a term I have heard to describe a situation, of "Clear &
Present Danger", where the policing forces of government are to be
allowed, or have the temporary right, to override all the rules which
normally would apply the rest of the time.   This is what I think people
calculate when they decide it's okay to have intrusions into their
person or belongings, whether they are in a public or private domain
("just for this time; after that everything will go back to normal").

I think everything should be immediately privatized.  That would solve
everything.  Everyone would always know where they stood,
philosophically & practically, depending on whose ground they were
standing on.

:>)
   ..
Blanc