Social Dilemna

[WillyBWright]

You are the owner of the only video rental business in your community. The FBI presents you with a warrant for information regarding a regular customer. The charge is very serious. You must comply or go to jail until you do. You have the following list of charges for which you would comply, or you may refuse to comply. Compliance will mean a potentially devastating boycot of your business leading to almost certain bankruptcy. You may only choose one answer.

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Social Dilemna

This is my first poll with the new format. Please bear with me.

It's kind of a test of the Patiot Act. Which crime would be bad enough to get you to comply if you otherwise wouldn't?

Problem is if I say Patriot Act, everyone's gonna answer Terrorist.

I'll try to do better next time.

 

[Plainsman]

Re: Social Dilemna

I can't honestly answer the poll as I would give the information on the customer for all of those crimes.

 

[BoatBuoy]

Re: Social Dilemna

Same here. I'm not sure I understand the question.

 

[BLLDOGG]

Re: Social Dilemna

I would also give up the info but selected "Child Molestor" simply because of what it is


I don't really think the town would boycott if you told what the charges were but i guess I'm over thinking your post huh?

 

[xtraham]

Re: Social Dilemna

I can't honestly answer the poll as I would give the information on the customer for all of those crimes.

me too................

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Social Dilemna

Yeah, it's not presented well. If it's a bust, it's a bust.

It's kind of a test of the Patiot Act. Which crime would be bad enough to get you to comply if you otherwise wouldn't?

 

[rwise]

Re: Social Dilemna

what they said!

 

[xtraham]

Re: Social Dilemna

how about priority order........

1=Child Molester
2=Serial Rapist
3=Serial Murderer
4=Terrorist
5=I'd go to jail
6=Political Assassin

 

[JRJ]

Re: Social Dilemna

I wouldn't try to protect a possible felon.

 

[QC]

Re: Social Dilemna

All of the above for me except the jail time.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: Social Dilemna

This is an awful far reach to try to condem the patriot act.

 

[PW2]

Re: Social Dilemna

Yeah, If the FBI has a warrant, they have a warrant. It is issued by a court by definition.

You'r proverbial backside is grass if you don't comply.

If the choice is being, or not being stupid, I would choose not being stupid.

 

[Parrott_head]

Re: Social Dilemna

Ok, if you want to deal in hypothetical situations here is a good one:

You are a librarian. A law officer requests that you print up the name and addresses of all patrons that have checked a certain title. You ask if he has a warrant for this document. He replies that he does not but he still wants the list.

Do you comply?

Would the subject matter of the book influence your decision?


Here is a line to the American Librarian Association.
http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/WOissues/civilliberties/theusapatriotact/qandaprivacy.htm

 

[Plainsman]

Re: Social Dilemna

Ok, if you want to deal in hypothetical situations here is a good one:

You are a librarian. A law officer requests that you print up the name and addresses of all patrons that have checked a certain title. You ask if he has a warrant for this document. He replies that he does not but he still wants the list.

Do you comply?

Would the subject matter of the book influence your decision?


Here is a line to the American Librarian Association.
http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/WOissues/civilliberties/theusapatriotact/qandaprivacy.htm

If it's Charolets Web, no. If it's how to build a dirty bomb, you bet he gets the information. Seems like common sense to me. But it also seems that not a lot of people have that anymore.

 

[jtexas]

Re: Social Dilemna

A warrant is a warrant, only a journalist would go to jail to protect the listed suspects (note to any boating journalists who happen to read this: no offense intended).

parrotthead's example: sorry, agent Mulder, come back with a warrant, please. But if it's agent Scully, might have to reconsider...

 

[PW2]

Re: Social Dilemna

Ok, if you want to deal in hypothetical situations here is a good one:

You are a librarian. A law officer requests that you print up the name and addresses of all patrons that have checked a certain title. You ask if he has a warrant for this document. He replies that he does not but he still wants the list.

Do you comply?

Would the subject matter of the book influence your decision?


Here is a line to the American Librarian Association.
http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/WOissues/civilliberties/theusapatriotact/qandaprivacy.htm

If it's Charolets Web, no. If it's how to build a dirty bomb, you bet he gets the information. Seems like common sense to me. But it also seems that not a lot of people have that anymore.

So, Eric, you'd leave it up to the librarians to decide? Scary stuff!

Our librarians are entrusted to report just who exactly is reading "subversive" publications, at least according to the librarian's standards (presumably)? Now that is the stuff of a Franz Kafka or Ray Bradbury novel

 

[crunch]

Re: Social Dilemna

I'd have to answer Yes 1 through 6, unless the serial murderer was knocking off Lawyers, that's something I could get behind.

 

[Plainsman]

Re: Social Dilemna

Ok, if you want to deal in hypothetical situations here is a good one:

You are a librarian. A law officer requests that you print up the name and addresses of all patrons that have checked a certain title. You ask if he has a warrant for this document. He replies that he does not but he still wants the list.

Do you comply?

Would the subject matter of the book influence your decision?


Here is a line to the American Librarian Association.
http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/WOissues/civilliberties/theusapatriotact/qandaprivacy.htm

If it's Charolets Web, no. If it's how to build a dirty bomb, you bet he gets the information. Seems like common sense to me. But it also seems that not a lot of people have that anymore.

So, Eric, you'd leave it up to the librarians to decide? Scary stuff!

Our librarians are entrusted to report just who exactly is reading "subversive" publications, at least according to the librarian's standards (presumably)? Now that is the stuff of a Franz Kafka or Ray Bradbury novel

Yes I would. Unlike you, I still have faith the the average American. And If they had a warrant, wouldn't the same person have to offer up the information? So the difference between us is that you woulsdHAVE to see the warrant, where I would would use common sense? Do they not have to honor the warrant? Please enlighten me oh smart one.

 

[crunch]

Re: Social Dilemna

LOL... the Librarians in this neck of the woods use an out dated system that doesn't keep track of who read what.... K, it needs a bit of help from them, delete history.

Gotta love them ladies, they do it on principle.