On May 28, 4:21 am, John Smith I wrote:


Perhaps the ISP's should shoulder their responsibilities and walk in the
paths Americans have already established and do their job--thereby
allowing law enforcement to do theirs ...

It strikes me that at least the ISP which Todd refers to IS taking
some responsibility in assisting law enforcement by denying access to
those who use its facility to commit crimes.

Good on them!

With kindest personal wishes,

de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:

I don't believe I want an ISP taking the place of cops, nor do I wish
the police to run my ISP! Sounds to me, you are bit closer to making
"thought control police" of the ISP--especially, if they are assuming
that everyone taking a fictitious name is a criminal.

Indeed, I am aware of the witness protection program giving false
identities to whole families to protect them (bet some family members go
on to commit crimes under these new names too!) Every citizen here is
first responsible for his/her own protection. If assuming a false
identity for ones protection is against the law, I should wonder if I am
still living in America or not?

Anyone giving up personal liberty for safety is not only a wimp, he/she
is a clear and present danger to America, motherhood, brotherhood and
the colors of green and grey! He/she deserves NO protection, let alone
consideration!

Of course, here in California, the mooselums already own most
hotels/motels and convenience/"mom & pop" stores, why not ISP's,
newspapers, magazines and phone companies next? Why control our own
communications when the enemy can do it cheaper? :-(

Regards,
JS