ASSIGNMENT

Assignment

Assignment

I believe privacy, or the need thereof, should be community-mediated question. I don't believe the State (or any business interest) should hinder with my privacy. I believe persons should be to blame for their own communities. I desire to blame, ethical people surrounding me, rather the long arm of the State holding me under its thumb.

James Stacey Taylor, in his item, In “Praise of Big Brother” why we should learn to Stop worrying and love (Some) government surveillance, makes a feeble, theoretical (and therefore, not practical), contention that the state should location all of its people under surveillance at all times and in all locations, encompassing their agencies, school rooms, shops-- and even their bedrooms. He proceeds on to clarify that claim somewhat by saying that genuine visual newspapers of the household sphere require not be produced; heat-sensing surveillance can be utilised rather than, giving the State ample data considering what happened in the dwelling, should it be required for any "morally permissible" cause, of course.

Taylor's major justification for such farthest surveillance appears to arise mainly from his assertion that such activity would discourage misdeed and make the lawless individual fairness scheme more just.

What "criminal behavior" does this friend believe he's going to apprehend in the public eye? The yogurt robbers at the food shop store?! The children spray-painting graffiti under the bridge?! Maybe a little prostitution. Drug-dealing. And many of "illegal" immigration.

I accept as factual that when talking of ethics and criminality, it is of paramount significance to differentiate between what is criminal and what is illegal. No state fairness scheme is flawless, and some regulations are compelled to be unjust. Likewise, no state fairness scheme is solely free of corruption, and some state activity is compelled to be criminal, as the torture of prisoners at Guantanamo will attest. ...