perfidy

My response to Trish's fears in my recent big brother post was lighthearted. But when I think about the real problems of increasing surveillance, out of control federal agencies, the erosion of civil liberties and the prospect of ubiquitous law enforcement I oscillate between long periods of complacency punctuated my moments of extreme paranoia.

On the one hand, the traditions of the republic are still strong, as witnessed by the consensual freak out when poindexter revealed the TIA with its ubercreepy eye-in-the-pyramid logo. There are well funded organizations that fight the good fight in our stead, like for example the EFF.

Libertarians and others fear that the erosion of liberty is a ratchett effect, where there is an ever tightening grip of law and regulation and surveillance, and that every liberty lost is nearly impossible to regain. I have sympathy for this position - for example, the RICO statutes have proved impossible to remove, despite their manifold flaws, and their frequent abuse.
There are legitimate security considerations to be weighed - we should not ignore reasonable measures for the sake of protecting against a minor infringement. Its hard to enjoy liberty when you're dead.

I think that we should in the interest of protecting liberty use the following criteria to evaluate any new security legislation:

• How easy would it be to abuse this law/police power - to use it for purposes other than those intended? Like the RAVE act, for example, or the RICO statutes.
• Does this power actually mirror some older power? (For example, the cell phone taps in the Patriot act just extend the traditional wiretap power into the world of modern telecommunications - it allows the police to tap the person, even if he is rapidly switching phones. This is reasonable, and only technically an extension of police powers.)
• Does it effect citizens or non-citizens, and how easy would it be to blur the line? Increasing surveillance of non citizens is not a problem for me. Inspections on entry, tracking them while here, etc. Non citizens are a potential threat, and they have far less claim to privacy protections than citizens. (Sorry, Ross.)
• Does it create new enforcement agencies? I am of mixed mind about this. On the one hand, a thousand competing LE agencies would probably help us, as it would be less effective. On the other, it would be less effective. But the idea that every federal agency has its own paramilitary special forces style swat team is unnerving, and completely unnecessary. The only agencies that should have them are the Secret Service, the FBI and maybe the DEA. No one else, period.
• How much does it actually restrict our freedom, as opposed to how much does it invade our privacy? Both are bad, but the first is more important. We are not going to escape record keeping. That is out of the bag, and won't be put back. What we need to be careful of now is how that information is used, and who can use it. Problematical, I know, but a government file does not infringe my right to say what I want, believe what I want, live where I want, etc. Even if that file makes me nervous. Anyway, something to think about over your holiday weekend. 

I am an optimist though, and think that if we could repeal Prohibition, we can unpass some laws.