From: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 10:39:37 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Police & military access (fwd)
Message-ID: <199705240140.UAA21876@einstein.ssz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text



Forwarded message:

> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 23:23:31 -0700
> From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
> Subject: Re: Police & military access

> > Do police have any civil rights not endowed to a individual citizen?
> 
> No.  But on the job, doing their state assigned duties, they have
> access to instrumentalities not available to private citizens or
> off-duty police.  "On" and "off" duty may sometimes be a little fuzzy
> in practice, but the principle is clear.  It isn't a big deal, and
> it's not a matter of civil rights.

Which principle is clear? That police like to confuse the issue as much as
possible to their advantage?

Of course it is a matter of civil rights. The police are a representative of
the CIVIL authorities, you have truly missed the entire point of the
constitution.

>  A license to practice medicine
> gives you the ability to prescribe morphine.  A certain class of
> drivers license lets you drive a school bus full of children. 

True, but there is NO law that can dictate which doctor I choose let alone
if I choose one at all. At least there I have a choice, because of this the
comparison you are trying to draw is broke.


                                                    Jim Choate
                                                    CyberTects
                                                    ravage@ssz.com