When do we say "enough"

[Baron Max]

..........................

Wanderer, you should work a bit on your sarcasm ....lots of what you're posting is very, very close to the truth for many, many people. Thus, for them, your post aren't exaggerated sarcastic at all.

That's just my humble opinion, of course. You certainly don't have to take any advice from me, that's for sure.

Baron Max

 

[-Bob-]

Wanderer-

Despite your eloquent locution on the merits of faggot control, you failed to answer Baron Max's question, didn't you?

Just to make it clearer, he asked- what do you have to hide? What is it that you're doing in our space that you don't want people to see?

In the case of 'Pot Smoker', the answer might be quite clear. I have sympathy for his situation. God knows, I was also fond of the crack-pipe as a boy, and I would often enjoy carousing with my bong-buddies when not in view of the authorities or parental units.

But if you're going to break a fucking law, do it like a man. Be prepared for the consequences.

And who the hell said anything about cameras in the home? Don't you get the point? There's public, and there's private. I mean, of course we all do things that we might want to hide. What red-blooded American doesn't have a closet filled with S&M gear, Asian porn and fancy dildoes?

But thats different.

 

[-Bob-]

when you think what some people do to get on TV you'd think they'd WANt cameras in their bedrooms
i have seen people lick old men's armpits, snog old women with no teeth, be buried alive and have live rats crawling all over them, and thats just for starters

so what they moanin at some camera watchin em shit on the toilet....dont make sense to me...no sir

Duendy! I'm Delighted.

The answer is simple: people do want cameras in their bedrooms.

After all, thats what the internet is for.

Watching those eighteen-year-olds go potty... oh. It's even more tittilating when they don't think anyone's watching.

Its a fetish our society has. It's the reason we go on and on about this shit.

 

[Baron Max]

-Bob-

As you can see, people only want to complain, to bitch n' moan, to write crap on Internet forums ....they don't REALLY want to solve any issues. Hell, if they did solve some of those issues, they'd have nothing to complain about, would they? ...LOL!

Baron Max

 

[top mosker]

Fetish? Come now... this isn't some pervert watching young, hot, college coeds - this is state sponsered surveilence in our academic institutions. All in the name of "homeland security." In Reno, Nevada.

I spoke with an old man the other day who told me the one thing that stuck with him all these years from his only philosophy class in college. "The opposite of hate isn't love, it's indifference and apathy."

 

[-Bob-]

Fetish? Come now... this isn't some pervert watching young, hot, college coeds - this is state sponsered surveilence in our academic institutions. All in the name of "homeland security." In Reno, Nevada.

It's the principle of cameras watching you in a public place that I have no problem with. Schools are now a target for terrorism, so I imagine that the 'homeland security' office has a good excuse to put them there. Beyond that, I don't know shit. They could be studying student's behaviors in order to control them. Perhaps.

Although reading the article, it seems like they were interested in a single guy and perhaps went beyond their jurisdiction.

I spoke with an old man the other day who told me the one thing that stuck with him all these years from his only philosophy class in college. "The opposite of hate isn't love, it's indifference and apathy."

What are you trying to suggest? That I find something to hate?

 

[duendy]

Wanderer, you should work a bit on your sarcasm ....lots of what you're posting is very, very close to the truth for many, many people. Thus, for them, your post aren't exaggerated sarcastic at all.

That's just my humble opinion, of course. You certainly don't have to take any advice from me, that's for sure.

Baron Max

hahaaa, Baron Max, i know we've clashed about Queer marriages an all, but i really dig this post of yours

actually WANDERER cracks me up. i love his/her intelligence, and humour's a real turn on anyhow, but as i followed suit, and noted the sarcasm was being noticed..i, haha realized the same as you...........but its well funny and hope he'll carry on showing up hypocrisy big style

i'll do the other stuff if i have time

thanks

 

[Mystech]

Wanderer, you should work a bit on your sarcasm ....lots of what you're posting is very, very close to the truth for many, many people. Thus, for them, your post aren't exaggerated sarcastic at all.

Max, I believe that that is exactly his point. You have a wonderful point for stating the blatantly obvious, and yet somehow being completely blind to it. . .

 

[top mosker]

It's the principle of cameras watching you in a public place that I have no problem with. Schools are now a target for terrorism, so I imagine that the 'homeland security' office has a good excuse to put them there.

Yes, a terrorist target would most likely be the Frandsen Humanities building, where the English Department meticulously grades obscure assignments about the sociological, philosophical meaning in 19th century English Literature and read their students' bad poetry.

Does anyone here even understand terrorism in its historical context? How about the American government's use of unknown fears to escalate military actions. Or do you remember just what you saw on 9-11?

 

[Baron Max]

Yes, a terrorist target would most likely be the Frandsen Humanities building, where the English Department...

Well, I'm sure that's what those Russians were saying ....until the terrorists took over that school and all those little kids were killed.

With terrorism, one can't be reactionary, one must be pro-active.

Baron Max

 

[isaacdelongchamp]

Well, I'm sure that's what those Russians were saying ....until the terrorists took over that school and all those little kids were killed.

Cameras watching the school wouldn't have done a thing to stop that.

Anyway Baron, here's my problem with this situation:
If homeland security save the tapes, or if its digital, files, that is a lot of power. And whats stopping them from archiving the files? There are 80 cameras at UNR, with plans for a camera on every building. Imagine being a UNR student living on campus after all the cameras in place. Every time you enter or leave the dorms, go to class, or just walk by a building, you're caught on tape. A decent chunk of your life is now on file. It would be possible to go back through the footage and collect information about you, such as who you were talking with and when, your daily routines, and any variation from them. Multiply this times every student in the same situation and this is a tremendous amount of power for whoever owns the tapes/files, which happens to be homeland security.

And maybe I'm just paranoid, but I really don't trust that the department of homeland security is looking out for what I would consider the good of society.

Basically, cameras=power=potential for abuse

 

[Baron Max]

Basically, cameras=power=potential for abuse

Hmm, can you name anything in life that does NOT have a "potential" for abuse?

>"And maybe I'm just paranoid, ..."<

Yeah, could be. But if so, why just pick on security cameras? Why not those silly-assed cell phone cameras, too? I see a tremendous "potential" for abuse with those things, don't you?

Baron Max

 

[top mosker]

Hmm, can you name anything in life that does NOT have a "potential" for abuse?

>"And maybe I'm just paranoid, ..."<

Yeah, could be. But if so, why just pick on security cameras? Why not those silly-assed cell phone cameras, too? I see a tremendous "potential" for abuse with those things, don't you?

Baron Max

Cell phone cameras are not controlled exclusively by the department of homeland security - an institution (government) which is supposed to be "of the people, for the people, and by the people" not a draconian surveillance and information gathering bureaucracy.

Pau... er, Max, why do you bother to mess up perfectly good discusions, when you are just getting off on playing devil's advocate. It's really quite annoying.

 

[isaacdelongchamp]

give me an example for a potential of abuse with cellphone cameras. i dont see a tremendous potential for abuse with those.