3 Reasons the "Nothing to Hide" Crowd Should Be Worried

[TitanTiger 20,708]

...about government surveillance.

3 Reasons the ‘Nothing to Hide’ Crowd Should Be Worried About Government Surveillance

Scott Shackford|

Jun. 12, 2013 4:30 pm

Responding to a popular reaction to news of the National Security Agency’s massive data collection program, blogger Daniel Sieradski started a Twitter feed called “Nothing to Hide.” He has retweeted hundreds of people who have declared in one form or another that they are not concerned that the federal government may spy on them. They say they have done nothing wrong, so they have nothing to hide. If it helps the government fight terrorists, go ahead, take their civil liberties away.

In his blog, a frustrated Sieradski listed many of the abuses of power our federal government is known for; he is not happy with the "nothing to hide" crowd.

There are many, many reasons to be concerned about the rise of the surveillance state, even if you have nothing to hide. Or rather, even if you think you have nothing to hide. For those confronted by such simplistic arguments, here are a three counterarguments that perhaps might get these people thinking about what they’re actually giving up.

1. Every American Is Probably a Criminal, Really

That Americans think they have nothing to hide in the first place is a sign of how little attention they're paying to the behavior of our Department of Justice. Many Americans have run afoul of federal laws without even knowing it. Tim Carney noted at the Washington Examiner:

Copy a song to your laptop from a friend's Beyonce CD? You just violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Did you buy some clothes in Delaware because they were tax free? You're probably evading taxes. Did you give your 20-year-old nephew a glass of wine at dinner? Illegal in many states.

Citizens that the federal government wants to indict, the federal government can indict if it monitors them closely enough. That's why it's so disturbing to learn that the federal government doesn't need to obtain a warrant on us in order to get our emails and phone records.

Attorney Harvey Silverglate even wrote a book about it, Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent. The Department of Justice has been notably and egregiously using federal laws to destroy lives. Former Tribune employee Matthew Keys is facing federal charges and possibly prison time because he gave his old password to a member of Anonymous, who changed a headline at the website for the Los Angeles Times. The vagueness of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act makes violating a website’s terms of service a possible felony. We’re not just referring to government websites. All websites. Given the digital focus of the PRISM program, everybody should be concerned about what could potentially happen should that data end up in the hands of federal prosecutors.

The “nothing to hide” crowd's involvement in political activism is likely limited. That’s perfectly fine. Nobody should feel obligated to join the Occupy movement or a Tea Party organization or be the kind of person who might end up on a politician’s enemies list. But to say “I have nothing to hide” is a fundamentally selfish declaration. What about parents, sisters, brothers, partners, and other loved ones? Can we say the same for them? You don’t have to have an illness whose suffering can be eased with the use of medical marijuana to be concerned about the way the federal government treats this industry. Would you say, “I don’t need medical marijuana so I don’t care if they imprison those who do”? Sadly, some people do. Fundamentally, saying “I have nothing to hide,” is similar to saying “I don’t care about those who do.”

Next: The problem with trusting the government.

2. The Federal Government Has Abused its Surveillance Powers Before

While most Gen Xers were still very young and before any Millennials were born America went through similar controversies in the wake of the Vietnam War and the Watergate Scandal. In 1975, Senator Frank Church (D-Idaho) put together a committee (which would eventually be known as the Church Committee) to investigate abuses of the law by intelligence agencies. Abuses included spying on leftist activists, opening and reading private mail, and using the IRS as a weapon. Sound familiar? There’s a reason why Baby Boomers have started comparing Barack Obama to Richard Nixon. The value of doing so has been lost to the ages; everything politically awful that happens in America is compared to Tricky Dick.

The defense that the current secret NSA/PRISM data collection plan can only target foreigners in foreign territory shouldn’t settle anything, even if it’s actually true, because that’s just a description of how the plan is currently being used, not how it might be used tomorrow or under the next presidential administration. And we have absolutely no way of knowing that the description of how the program operates is true anyway, because the oversight has been hidden from public view. We do know that a court ruling in 2011 determined that the U.S. government had engaged in unconstitutional behavior in its surveillance program, but the Department of Justice is trying to block Americans from seeing this court ruling and understanding what happened. We’re supposed to trust this oversight. We know they’ve broken the law once, but we don’t know what they did, what's stopping it from happening again, what harm was caused, and whether there was any sort of punishment or discipline.

Next: Not even the government can really control where data ends up.

3. Government Is Made of People, and Some People Are Creepy, Petty, Incompetent, or Dangerous

Gilberto Valle had an unusual sexual fetish. He fantasized about kidnapping, killing, and eating young women.

Valle was also a member of the New York Police Department, and was convicted in March of plotting to make his fantasies a reality. Whether he really meant to do so is up in the air (his defense was that this was all sexual roleplay), but he was also convicted of looking up his potential targets in a national crime database, accessible due to his position of authority.

While the federal government is arguing that all this massive metadata being collected by the National Security Agency is subject to significant oversight and not subject to abuse, it is at the same time trying to blame the IRS targeting political and conservative nonprofits for special questioning as the actions of rogue employees and poor management.

You don’t have to be a privacy purist to be concerned about bad or dangerous people getting information about you. Some of them work for the government, and they may be interested in you for reasons that have nothing to do with politics. Even if you have nothing to hide.

http://reason.com/ar...-to-hide-crowd/

[alexava 6,974]

a failed attempt at fear mongering.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

a failed attempt at fear mongering.

No, a realistic showing of how seemingly innocuous information can and has been used in ways to harm people "with noting to hide" before.

[autigeremt 6,970]

a failed attempt at fear mongering.

Failure? I don't think so.....

[alexava 6,974]

1. If you are committing piracy, you do have something to hide. Tthe nsa does not give a s***. 2. If someone has a sexual fetish that includes killing and eating his victims he will find victims through whatever means he can make available to himself, government or he would seek a career in communications, then use the liberty of privacy laws to protect himself. 3. The government has always been able to get info when they need or want it regardless of the constitutional liberties that are being steped on. They just couldn't use it to convict. The bottom line is this is the fabricated scandal of the week that will go away and be forgotten about when then next "scandal" breaks. Huge fail.

[AU64 10,122]

The only "huge failure" IMO is failure to acknowledge what some people within a government agency can do with your private information. In the old days the favorite use of such snooping was to target and blackmail people over the type behavior that while not illegal, was certain to get them in trouble with spouses or their bosses. Now the snooping can be used to pick unknown people from the masses.....such as people who support a different political agenda...and to sic the IRS or OSHA or any of a hundred federal agencies on them to make their lives miserable....or to release their names to friendly political allies who will then target them with boycotts and harassment. Anyone who thinks this is just fear-mongering, is spending too much time reading the comics and sports pages. This is from Germany but count on it, Verizon and the other US cell companies do the same thing. http://www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-vorratsdaten and the government has access to the information.

[autigeremt 6,970]

1. If you are committing piracy, you do have something to hide. Tthe nsa does not give a s***. 2. If someone has a sexual fetish that includes killing and eating his victims he will find victims through whatever means he can make available to himself, government or he would seek a career in communications, then use the liberty of privacy laws to protect himself. 3. The government has always been able to get info when they need or want it regardless of the constitutional liberties that are being steped on. They just couldn't use it to convict. The bottom line is this is the fabricated scandal of the week that will go away and be forgotten about when then next "scandal" breaks. Huge fail.

I guess his mis use of liberty should cause the law abiding to lose theirs in the process? Yeah, that's the failure.

[alexava 6,974]

1. If you are committing piracy, you do have something to hide. Tthe nsa does not give a s***. 2. If someone has a sexual fetish that includes killing and eating his victims he will find victims through whatever means he can make available to himself, government or he would seek a career in communications, then use the liberty of privacy laws to protect himself. 3. The government has always been able to get info when they need or want it regardless of the constitutional liberties that are being steped on. They just couldn't use it to convict. The bottom line is this is the fabricated scandal of the week that will go away and be forgotten about when then next "scandal" breaks. Huge fail.

I guess his mis use of liberty should cause the law abiding to lose theirs in the process? Yeah, that's the failure.

i still haven't seen anyone lose any. The law abiding need not worry about it. The crooks and obama haters are the ones crying over this.

[autigeremt 6,970]

1. If you are committing piracy, you do have something to hide. Tthe nsa does not give a s***. 2. If someone has a sexual fetish that includes killing and eating his victims he will find victims through whatever means he can make available to himself, government or he would seek a career in communications, then use the liberty of privacy laws to protect himself. 3. The government has always been able to get info when they need or want it regardless of the constitutional liberties that are being steped on. They just couldn't use it to convict. The bottom line is this is the fabricated scandal of the week that will go away and be forgotten about when then next "scandal" breaks. Huge fail.

I guess his mis use of liberty should cause the law abiding to lose theirs in the process? Yeah, that's the failure.

i still haven't seen anyone lose any. The law abiding need not worry about it. The crooks and obama haters are the ones crying over this.

Yeah right. You haven't seen anyone lose it because you don't care to see it. It's happening everyday across this country. For some it's taken straight from them. Others are being hosed and they just fail to see it.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

1. If you are committing piracy, you do have something to hide. Tthe nsa does not give a s***.

Unless someone at the NSA decides they want to f*** with you and use piracy as leverage.

2. If someone has a sexual fetish that includes killing and eating his victims he will find victims through whatever means he can make available to himself, government or he would seek a career in communications, then use the liberty of privacy laws to protect himself.

If someone wants to make a living by burglarizing homes, he will find victims through whatever means he can make available to himself.

Doesn't mean the government should hand him the keys to your house and a schedule for when you'll be out of town.

3. The government has always been able to get info when they need or want it regardless of the constitutional liberties that are being steped on. They just couldn't use it to convict. The bottom line is this is the fabricated scandal of the week that will go away and be forgotten about when then next "scandal" breaks. Huge fail.

Yeah. And when we find out they do it, we prosecute those who take advantage, not shrug our shoulders and excuse it.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

1. If you are committing piracy, you do have something to hide. Tthe nsa does not give a s***. 2. If someone has a sexual fetish that includes killing and eating his victims he will find victims through whatever means he can make available to himself, government or he would seek a career in communications, then use the liberty of privacy laws to protect himself. 3. The government has always been able to get info when they need or want it regardless of the constitutional liberties that are being steped on. They just couldn't use it to convict. The bottom line is this is the fabricated scandal of the week that will go away and be forgotten about when then next "scandal" breaks. Huge fail.

I guess his mis use of liberty should cause the law abiding to lose theirs in the process? Yeah, that's the failure.

i still haven't seen anyone lose any. The law abiding need not worry about it. The crooks and obama haters are the ones crying over this.

The second the government is allowed to secretly poke into my private business with no reason to believe I've warranted the scrutiny, I've lost liberty.

[alexava 6,974]

1. If you are committing piracy, you do have something to hide. Tthe nsa does not give a s***.

Unless someone at the NSA decides they want to f*** with you and use piracy as leverage.

#1 As i said, the crooks are at risk.

2. If someone has a sexual fetish that includes killing and eating his victims he will find victims through whatever means he can make available to himself, government or he would seek a career in communications, then use the liberty of privacy laws to protect himself.

If someone wants to make a living by burglarizing homes, he will find victims through whatever means he can make available to himself.

Doesn't mean the government should hand him the keys to your house and a schedule for when you'll be out of town.

#2 Your mailman knows when you are out of town. Is that a loss of liberty? The local post office could be selling that info to crooks now. How does that not infuriate you? My point is for most of us we are in no wsy of any interest to any agency, but crying foul over NOTHING. We preach freedom and liberty then whine because the legal age to purchase birth control is adjusted.

3. The government has always been able to get info when they need or want it regardless of the constitutional liberties that are being steped on. They just couldn't use it to convict. The bottom line is this is the fabricated scandal of the week that will go away and be forgotten about when then next "scandal" breaks. Huge fail.

Yeah. And when we find out they do it, we prosecute those who take advantage, not shrug our shoulders and excuse it.

or we look at it logically and see that innocent law abiding people are at a greater risk of dying in a terrorist attack than being convicted of petty piracy or eaten by a sexual predator.

[alexava 6,974]

Sorry that was sloppy im on a phone.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Sorry, but I'm not finding the part where this only applies if you feel you have nothing to hide:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It's quite straightforward. You don't get to gather info on people who haven't done anything then go fishing.

Don't like it? There's a process outlined in the Constitution for amending it. Follow that process.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

#1 As i said, the crooks are at risk.

And as the article was pointing out, there a lot of people who think they have "nothing to hide" that can find themselves in trouble.

#2 Your mailman knows when you are out of town. Is that a loss of liberty? The local post office could be selling that info to crooks now. How does that not infuriate you? My point is for most of us we are in no wsy of any interest to any agency, but crying foul over NOTHING. We preach freedom and liberty then whine because the legal age to purchase birth control is adjusted.

Well, my mailman doesn't because we have someone watch our house. But even if he did, what he doesn't have is an inventory of my house and keys to the front door and a moving van paid for by me to rummage through and haul off whatever he wishes.

Freedom and liberty count far beyond whether some bad guy at the NSA does anything with the info he gets. Part of freedom and liberty is that people who have no right to my information under our Constitution don't get it just by claiming they need it to catch other bad guys.

or we look at it logically and see that innocent law abiding people are at a greater risk of dying in a terrorist attack than being convicted of petty piracy or eaten by a sexual predator.

No, just like the article pointed out in actual history...we prosecute people for it and we put up safeguards to prevent such abuses of power from happening again.

[telling tiger 156]

Sorry, but I'm not finding the part where this only applies if you feel you have nothing to hide:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It's quite straightforward. You don't get to gather info on people who haven't done anything then go fishing.

Don't like it? There's a process outlined in the Constitution for amending it. Follow that process.

This, a 1000xs, this. We don't know that anyone has abused this information, that isn't the issue. The fact that it has even become an issue without prior discussion in the public legal domain , is the issue. Decisions are made by a secret court. WE shouldn't be willing to give up our privacy in order to catch a few criminals. I'm not willing to give away my knives, so I do not suffer a POTENTIAL cut. Legal search and seizure tactical measures have been in place since our nation formed. The only thing different now is the available technology that has given added capability to "law enforcement" to gather information. As a society, it is our duty to adapt and adopt laws, that protect our rights and security. This situation points out ,we are behind in this effort, by about 20 years or so.

[homersapien 11,812]

a failed attempt at fear mongering.

Failure? I don't think so.....

You certainly got that right!

[alexava 6,974]

Sorry, but I'm not finding the part where this only applies if you feel you have nothing to hide:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It's quite straightforward. You don't get to gather info on people who haven't done anything then go fishing.

Don't like it? There's a process outlined in the Constitution for amending it. Follow that process.

This, a 1000xs, this. We don't know that anyone has abused this information, that isn't the issue. The fact that it has even become an issue without prior discussion in the public legal domain , is the issue. Decisions are made by a secret court. WE shouldn't be willing to give up our privacy in order to catch a few criminals. I'm not willing to give away my knives, so I do not suffer a POTENTIAL cut. Legal search and seizure tactical measures have been in place since our nation formed. The only thing different now is the available technology that has given added capability to "law enforcement" to gather information. As a society, it is our duty to adapt and adopt laws, that protect our rights and security. This situation points out ,we are behind in this effort, by about 20 years or so.

these "few" criminals are trying to kill us in masses. I agree we can adapt and adopt laws. But in the mean time i want the mass killers in handcuffs, not the people trying to protect us from them. I still have yet to see even an inconvenience from this, just empty crowing. Every time an attack is done there seems to be a lot of finger pointing and blame games for not catching the obvious (in hindsight) warning signs. Then we denounce agencies for using technology as a proactive measure, and no one even knew it was happening much less harmed by it.

[telling tiger 156]

I never made the claim anyone was harmed, I stated the exact opposite, actually. I do not want my privacy compromised by anyone. At all. Ever. I'm not concerned with anyone understanding that or not. I work in an industry where we protect a huge amount of intellectual property. I have first hand experience with that being compromised. There are entire industries created around preserving that IP and the associated personal privacy. If someone can't understand how far our behind country is with this conversation and the laws adapting, I'm not likely to be able to help them.

[alexava 6,974]

I take your word that we are behind. In 2001 we were behind in homeland security. You adjust and adapt to your environment when it changes. Im ok with the secrecy of the data collection. Criminals talk a lot more when they DONT know someone is listening.

[telling tiger 156]

Not so secret anymore huh? lol. Even the Boston bombing brothers had their phone records traced and followed AFTER, the bombing. That could have been done with a warrant, no phone company in the world would have hesitated in cooperating and no judge would've denied the request. Any previous warnings we had about them, came from the Russian gov. We have a right to privacy. I was opposed to this and MANY parts of the Patriot Act when introduced and still have the same oppositions. Who I call is none of their business. If I am a criminal it becomes their business, BUT, not until I become a criminal, not before. I was opposed then and am opposed now. I am consistent with true belief, not partisan. There are enough people who are only that, on this forum to last 30 life times. .

[alexava 6,974]

Im not partisan either. I was a fan of the patriot act then and now despite the previous admin.

[homersapien 11,812]

Not so secret anymore huh? lol. Even the Boston bombing brothers had their phone records traced and followed AFTER, the bombing. That could have been done with a warrant, no phone company in the world would have hesitated in cooperating and no judge would've denied the request. Any previous warnings we had about them, came from the Russian gov. We have a right to privacy. I was opposed to this and MANY parts of the Patriot Act when introduced and still have the same oppositions. Who I call is none of their business. If I am a criminal it becomes their business, BUT, not until I become a criminal, not before. I was opposed then and am opposed now. I am consistent with true belief, not partisan. There are enough people who are only that, on this forum to last 30 life times. .

But you are OK with private companies having the same data on your calls?

What's to keep them from "profiling you" without your knowledge? Heck, they may already be doing it.

[telling tiger 156]

You are old enough to have only had phone service back in the day from Ma Bell. My phone company has my info just like Ma Bell had yours then. They knew who you called, how long you talked and charged you accordingly. That is about as much of a non-issue as I can imagine. Companies profile us all day everyday, the mayo coupon you get in Sunday's paper is determined by demographic purchasing for your area and if you've used debit, check or credit, even by your SPECIFIC address. I don't want it and want it prevented. If you feel differently, carry on. I won't be changing my opinion of it.

[Auburn85 434]

Not so secret anymore huh? lol. Even the Boston bombing brothers had their phone records traced and followed AFTER, the bombing. That could have been done with a warrant, no phone company in the world would have hesitated in cooperating and no judge would've denied the request. Any previous warnings we had about them, came from the Russian gov. We have a right to privacy. I was opposed to this and MANY parts of the Patriot Act when introduced and still have the same oppositions. Who I call is none of their business. If I am a criminal it becomes their business, BUT, not until I become a criminal, not before. I was opposed then and am opposed now. I am consistent with true belief, not partisan. There are enough people who are only that, on this forum to last 30 life times. .

I agree with the part about the Boston brothers. I mean, leading up to 9/11 there was a bunch of info and intelligence circulating around about a big attack. Of course there was the infamous memo a month before 9/11. Sure, it didn't list New York specifically, but there were warning signs prior. Our government can have a plethora amount of intelligence and information, but it comes down to how well it is used and communicated between intelligence agencies.