View Single Post
Old 05-24-2005, 10:57 AM   #32
Prudence
Beelzeboobs, Esq.
 
Prudence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gavel - I haz it
Posts: 6,287
Prudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of cool
Send a message via MSN to Prudence Send a message via Yahoo to Prudence
Quote:
Originally Posted by scaeagles
If you are referring to the library records thing that was a big deal a while ago, I never had a problem with it because it is called a "public" library. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place.
Is the use of the word "public" the kicker? If so, does[should] that also apply to school records? Public schools are open to children living within district boundaries and supported by public funds, much as public libraries are open to residents living within district boundaries and supported by public funds. Should parents have a reasonable expectation of privacy with regards to their children's school records? [Bonus question: what about their public school library records?]

Also, if I recall correctly, the "library records thing" also applied to bookstores, which can be privately owned establishments. Should they be exempt, or are they public in the sense that the public is welcome within the establishment? In which case, is there a differentiation between a bookstore which is open to the public and a community hospital which is open to the public?

And I'm not just trying to be pedantic. If there's going to be a set of interactions and records that are protected/private, and a set that aren't, I'd like a clear understanding of which is which.

Although frankly I think that particular provision is a load of horse pucky. If national security is truly threatened by books checked out of the public libraries, librarians across the country deserve enormous pay increases as front line warriors in the Fight Against Terror. I have no problem with traditional warrants, reviewed by the judicial system. I *do* have a problem with secret warrants forever hidden from view. It allows less scrupulous law enforcement officials to take advantage of the system, target the least experienced librarian, and prevent him or her from seeking counsel from an administrator on the legal limits of the search. And it would be lovely if I could give you some statistics or particulars on that, but anything I know is stuff I shouldn't legally have been told anyhow.

I'm also concerned about a curtailment of scholarly activity. I did once have a citation for this, and I'll try to dredge it up, but I read an article about a faculty member doing legitimate research on public water systems. But because of the Patriot Act, he was afraid of being targeted as a terrorist based on the types of materials (mostly maps) that he checked out of the library. So he stopped checking them out. Not that he stopped borrowing them, he just didn't check them out first -- just walked out with them.

Not a particularly secure system.

And frankly I think it's mostly misdirection. Don't worry about that deficit/social security/homelessness/hunger/education/elder care/etc...
__________________
traguna macoities tracorum satis de
Prudence is offline   Submit to Quotes Reply With Quote