On Fri, 2 Jan 1998, Vunch wrote:

> Cameras on the job and drug testing at work are ok with me as I believe they
> contribute to the health and safety of everyone.

Yikes!! Aside from the dubious claim that these things are really done for
"the health and safety of everyone" are you really content to use this as
your litmus test for surveillance? So if we could come up with some
vaugely plausible health/safety justifications, you'd agree to a camera in
your living room? How about in the bedroom, to monitor activity that might
lead to the spread of AIDS??

So you don't support the 4th Amendment protections against unwarranted
search & seizure??

While I think the concerns you list below are valid, I could easier come
up with public safety justifications for them than I could for a hidden
camera in the employee locker room......

Chomsky argues that all forms of authority must bear a heavy burden of
justification. Those that utilize hidden surveillance and random searches
of bodily fluids in particular, I'd say.



 > 1). any kind of cataloguing and evaluating
of internet activities >
> 2). the inappropriate use of weapons by police during criminal investigations
> where unarmed "suspects" are shot and killed!!!  which could be considered as
> a kind of overt surveillance policy
>
> 3). gerrymandering of electoral districts and manipulation of property values
> including
> accessibility to loans through data gathering efforts
>
> 4). the use of criminal records to limit employment opportunities within and
> without the government, especially in cases where no charges were sustained.
>