I didn't miss your point either. My point is that I don't feel particularly good about breaking the law or encouraging others to do so in order to fight a wrong.
It's the same reason I'm against torturing suspected terrorists. Whatever we gain from breaking the law is not worth what we loose. I prefer to hold the moral high ground.
But like I have always said, it's your site and your rules. I thought about just sitting out this thread, but it bothered me a little last night and so I decided to at least post my point of view. Who knows, maybe I'll change your mind.
Obviously you couched it more in terms of what YOU would do. But I read a "call to action" in there. I'm a little concerned about the same people that didn't know grabbing an image from Google would be an issue also getting burned for invasion of privacy.
Having this content would obviously make for juicy content for the site. But there is a solution that doesn't involve breaking the law. I would propose that someone, maybe you, within the context of "citizen journalist" could contact the lawyers, the photographers, the stock company owners, or any other interested party and let them know that you are reporting on this issue and would like to conduct a recorded interview.
As long as they are made aware that the conversation is being recorded, there is no invasion of privacy issue and I think you will be surprised at the results.
Some thoughts on the above:
First, breaking the law in fighting a wrong is what is done all the time by law enforcement agencies. For example: wire tapping is illegally done in the name of national security, and they wont hesitate to do it. We don't live in a TV world, this stuff happens at the drop of a hat. What makes the NSA's or CIA's issues more legit than the need for my personal security? And our taxes pay for their resources!
Second, torturing terrorists is not the same as recording phone calls outside of simply breaking a law. Violations of different laws carry different penalties that are "supposed" to fit the crime!
Third, what is moral high ground? This is defined differently within each of us whereas law is a constant! Law and morality are not synonymous, yet some mistakenly merge the two! The truth is, laws can be immoral! A person has a moral compass. Example: if a man was about to whip a slave back in 1825 for the "crime" of accidentally breaking the property of his master, and I was standing by and seeing it about to happen, and "knowing" with my moral compass that this is wrong, but fail to intercede because the law says the slave owner has the right...how is that taking moral high ground? Interfering would get me arrested and branded a negro lover. So stepping up would be a risk, because something that is wrong is legal, and defending against it has been made illegal. Failing to follow my conscience makes me a coward! If a law is made that harms innocents and also shields criminals, then that law is flawed and needs to be properly corrected by sovereign citizens. This was the mind of the founders of the US. There is a time and a purpose to everything under the sun, a time to obey laws, and a time to break them. Surely you're not comparing little people defending themselves against a wretched powerhouse company to the most powerful government in the world using its ridiculously uneven advantage over little prisoners by torturing them? Seriously?
Fourth, a call to action "is" necessary! This is an epidemic...look at the number of people that are posting their dilemmas on this site and others. People are being deliberately set up to fall victim to these absurdly overpriced penalties. Deliberately nasty people and attorneys are employed to gouge them in any way possible. They do so with bluster and bluff, lying to people about what might happen to scare them out as much money as they can, regardless of what financial difficulty or harm it poses...who knows, these vermin may have even caused a suicide. People agonize over these letters and lose sleep, read the posts. This virus is attacking helpless people and being shielded from their actions by impotent laws enacted by politicians, who are otherwise known as blood sucking parasites! Never heard of that? Look it up, it's verifiable! Such a business deserves to crumble and disappear! It's despicable!
Fifth, illegal recording only becomes an issue if the information gained is brought to anyone officials attention. If shared with a lawyer, it can be an invaluable tool. It can also be an ace in the hole. Also, such evidence can be used to influence a prosecutor to lay off a case. Further, if privacy violation charges are brought against you for doing such a thing and you were in a self defense mode by necessity...trust me, no company wants their dirty laundry aired nation wide prosecuting a case like that. The embarrassment would be epic. Believe this: the person that goes to jail for such a "crime" is doing a service for his country. Some things are worth going to jail, and even dying for...cowards will run. Taking down a douche company and it's douche legal team is an act worthy of praise, and a fund should be started to pay his family a healthy stipend for the time he is in jail...say, $250,000 a year. By the way, how do people get burned for recording conversations on the sly? Are there spybots that can detect them in our homes? So let's get this straight, I can listen to the conversation, and if I need to refer to it, it's my word against theirs...or, if I'm fortunate enough to have one or more people listening in on the conversation, we then need to rely on memories of the conversation...that's ok...but to have the certainty of a recording of some lying rodent breaking the law on me isn't? Further, it's ok for the government to use our tax paid for resources to break the law in the same way for the purposes of what they feel is national security to defend us all...but for me to defend my own security against a dangerous aggressor is not ok? Really? I wonder what the founders would have said? Perhaps they would have said, "the letter of the law kills, but the spirit of the law brings life and peace."? But then again, a convicted murderer once had his conviction overturned by a judge because the prosecutor read a bible verse in the courtroom during his closing argument. Wow! Is that justice...or perversion?
Finally, there are some unfortunate implications that go along with it, but I do get "your" point, that's just not how you would feel comfortable handling it, and disagree with the methods...and that's fine, that's why Matt is doing it, and others feel his rage and indignance too. The battle isn't for everyone. It may involve sacrifice and injury, but for a worthy cause, to some it's worth the price. "My" point here is to show "how" I see things differently! This is ultimately an issue of conscience...I can sleep soundly and peacefully if I "unlawfully" record a conversation with some douchebag that's out to cause me harm. Maybe you can't. People are convicted by their conscience for a number of things...the big question is why? The bible has an interesting verse where God says: "My people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge!" I know when something is right and wrong because the law of God has been written in my heart. It's wrong to have a law that protects criminal behavior...that's no just law, but is in itself a crime.
Show Posts