Blacknell.net

Politics, open government, and safe streets. And the constant incursion of cycling.

Category: Law Page 4 of 27

DC Cyclists: Heightened Law Enforcement

By

On April 1, 2010

In Cycling, DC, Law, Virginia

It’s that time of year again: local police departments are, in theory, promoting bicycle and pedestrian safety by . . . issuing warnings and tickets to bicycles and pedestrians. The folks over at BikeArlington just saw two cyclists pulled over on Wilson Blvd for running a light. Considering what a rarity that is, I assume that it’s part of this year’s Street Smart campaign.

Street Smart is an annual public education, awareness and behavioral change campaign in the Washington, DC, suburban Maryland and northern Virginia area. Since its beginning in 2002, the campaign has used radio, newspaper, and transit advertising, public awareness efforts, and added law enforcement, to respond to the challenges of pedestrian and bicyclist safety.

The Street Smart program emphasizes education of motorists and pedestrians through mass media. It is meant to complement, not replace, the efforts of state and local governments and agencies to build safer streets and sidewalks, enforce laws, and train better drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians.

I don’t really have any problem with enforcement actions against unsafe behavior on anyone’s part. However, I’m not really a fan of this program, as it combines arbitrary enforcement, a focus on the wrong parties, and I suspect that it is mostly ineffective at actually improving safety.

The “Street Smart” program is scheduled to run March 15 to April 15, but I suspect the good weather that just arrived won’t only bring out more cyclists, but also more officers who are willing to get out of their cars to issue warnings/citations. So stay alert, and don’t assume that what was fine last week is fine this week.

Digital Due Process

By

On March 30, 2010

In Distribution, Law, Policy, Tech

For reasons quite related to my previous post, this Digital Due Process effort is a step in the right direction:

As part of a broad coalition of privacy groups, think tanks, technology companies, and academics, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today issued recommendations for strengthening the federal privacy law [the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986] that regulates government access to private phone and Internet communications and records, including cell phone location data.

It’s an interesting coalition of rights-advocates (who are focused on the privacy of the individual) and businesses (which would benefit from more clarity in the law insofar as it 1) reduces their costs in dealing with legal uncertainties, and 2) creates more confidence in cloud-based services). Specifically, they want to:

The group’s four recommendations focus on how to update the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), a law originally passed in 1986 before the World Wide Web was invented and when the number of American cell phone users numbered in the tens of thousands rather than the hundreds of millions. The group recommends that the legal standards under which the government can obtain private communications and records be clarified and strengthened in order to:

* Better protect the privacy of communications and documents you store in the cloud

* Better protect you against secret tracking of your location through your cell phone or any other mobile device

* Better protect you against secret monitoring of when and with whom you communicate over the telephone or the Internet

* Better protect innocent Americans against government fishing expeditions through masses of communications data unrelated to a criminal suspect

This is going to be a long-term project, and I think we can expect a lot of pushback from law enforcement (both declared and those in the intelligence fields who would rather exploit the existing grey areas).  But it’s a positive move.

Just Trust Us

By

On March 30, 2010

In Distribution, Law, Society, Tech

This is just one of many reasons why you should be contributing to the Electronic Frontier Foundation:

A couple weeks ago, Sen. Rockefeller partnered with Sen. Olympia Snowe to introduce a major revision to the bill that, among other things, made changes the emergency “kill switch” provision. The revision was adopted by the committee last Thursday and the bill was approved. It’s now ready for consideration by the full Senate.

The revised bill would require the President to develop an “emergency response an restoration” plan with the help of private industry and other government agencies, but it is vague enough that it does not actually limit what the plan can include. The President would still have authority to declare an emergency and implement the plan without first seeking congressional approval, though he would have to report to Congress within 48 hours after declaring an emergency. The revised bill also doesn’t require the plan to be made public, so it could potentially give the President the same authority to restrict internet access as the original bill did, just without being explicitly and publicly stated in the legislation itself.

I’m sure people like former DNI Mike McConnell will trot out their cyberscare stories (see this great piece on how anyone using “cyber” is usually full of it.) declaring just how essential it is that we lock down the Internet.  Not too long ago, McConnell was out pushing this line:

We need to develop an early-warning system to monitor cyberspace, identify intrusions and locate the source of attacks with a trail of evidence that can support diplomatic, military and legal options — and we must be able to do this in milliseconds. More specifically, we need to re-engineer the Internet to make attribution, geo-location, intelligence analysis and impact assessment — who did it, from where, why and what was the result — more manageable. The technologies are already available from public and private sources and can be further developed if we have the will to build them into our systems and to work with our allies and trading partners so they will do the same.

Wired’s Ryan Singel helps clarify that:

Re-read that sentence. He’s talking about changing the internet to make everything anyone does on the net traceable and geo-located so the National Security Agency can pinpoint users and their computers for retaliation if the U.S. government doesn’t like what’s written in an e-mail, what search terms were used, what movies were downloaded. Or the tech could be useful if a computer got hijacked without your knowledge and used as part of a botnet.

Yeah, I think I’m going to pass on the advice of industry players that have devoted their lives to concealing the truth from the public.  I just fear that they’ll be as successful with this effort as they have been before.  That is, they never do manage to actually conceal the truth.  All they need to do is convince enough of the generally-uninterested public to trust their version, and the public will go along with it.  And, for the most part, that’s been a massively successful strategy.   I used to think the Internet would help put an end to that.  But more and more it looks like that might help put an end to the Internet.

KRS-One (Or, How to Tell the London Metro Police to Bugger Off)

By

On March 6, 2010

In Law, Policy, Society, UK

Knowledge Reigns Supreme-Over nearly everyone (bet you weren’t expecting that):

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9bfmW3iMqk[/youtube]

As describe at BB:

Glyn sez, “The Love Police do an amazing job demonstrating how to get out of being searched under section 44 of the Terrorism Act. Stopped by police outside the Tower of London, they avoid being searched, having to give their personal details and having their camera film looked at simply by stating the law, remaining calm and polite. (Although keeping the video camera rolling probably helped too.) The police sent an Inspector (rather senior), two Sergeants, five officers and four police cars. But in the end they walk away.”

We need more of this.  Desperately.

If Obama Forces Military Tribunals, Eric Holder Should Resign

By

On March 6, 2010

In Law, Politics

One of the few bright spots of principle in the Obama Administration had been its insistance that the American justice system was not outclassed by terrorists.  And now, it seems that Obama’s inability to stand up to even the weakest of criticism has the administration reconsidering.  LG&M suggests the proper response:

It’s every bit as illegitmate for the White House to order Holder what to do in this matter as it was for Richard Nixon to order Elliott Richardson to fire Archibald Cox. Barack Obama (let alone his messenger boy Emanuel — or is the other way around?) is not the nation’s chief law enforcement officer: Eric Holder is. Holder has spent the last three months telling everyone that considerations of basic justice argued for trying KSM in our regular courts, rather than in military tribunals set up for the purpose of disposing of particularly troublesome criminal cases.

Equality in DC

By

On March 2, 2010

In Law, Personal, Society

Almost.there.

Liz Cheney – As Un-American As They Come

By

On March 2, 2010

In Law, Society

Truly, she is an appalling human being.

3 Feet to Pass Fails in the VA House

By

On February 16, 2010

In Cycling, Law, Virginia

Due in no small part, I’m sure, to the urgings of Delegates Cosgrove & Carricco, the Virginia House of Delegates voted down HB 1048, which provided that motorists should give cyclists three feet when passing. This is very disappointing. The Virginia Bike Federation notes that there is still some hope, in the form of SB 566:

Senate Bill 566 containing just Three Foot Passing is still alive, and will be crossing over to the House Transportation Committee and then, hopefully, to the Full House, in the near future.

As soon as the roll call voting is posted I will forward it along and will urge everyone to contact their delegates expressing disappointment if they voted Nay and thanking them if they voted For the bill. Hopefully, we may be able to turn at least 6 or 7 votes around and get SB 566 passed.

I’ll post that list here, when I have it. I’d really – personally – appreciate any action that readers can take on the bill’s behalf.

Virginia’s 3 Feet to Pass Cyclists Law Up for Final Vote in House

By

On February 12, 2010

In Cycling, Law, Politics, Virginia

The always helpful Virginia Bicycling Federation reports that the proposed “3 feet to pass” bill, which provides that cars must give cyclists at least three feet of clearance when passing them, made it out of committee.  Barely:

After being reported out of Sub Committee yesterday by a 5-2 vote, HB1048, 3 foot passing & following too close, was reported out of the full House Transportation Committee this morning by a very tight 11-10 vote. Since the vote was electronically tallied and then taken down rather quickly, I’m not sure exactly who voted each way, but it appeared that all the D’s voted for the bill, joined by two or three R’s (which I think included Oder & Rust).

As in Sub Committee, there was even more discussion of how difficult it would be with the additional foot to legally pass a bicycle without going over the double center line on a two lane road. The strongest anti-cycling sentiment was expressed by Del. Cosgrove of Chesapeake, Del. Knight of Virginia Beach, who clearly voted against the bill, along with Del. Villanueva of Va Beach, even though the representative of that City and Bruce Drees of the Tidewater Bicycling Assn. both spoke in favor of it.

Remember, the Virginia Senate has already passed this bill, and it is an unlikely veto target.  So all that stands between this sensible idea becoming law is the Virginia House of Delegates.  VBF asks:

Now its on to the Full House floor (either on Saturday or Monday), where Chairman Joe May of Loudon (who also appeared to vote against the bill) wished our patron, Kaye Kory, a good-natured “Good luck on the floor” after he announced the result of the voting.

Now, we need EVERYONE to contact their delegate. If you don’t know who it is, you can find out at the VA General Assembly’s Who’s My Legislator page…

http://conview.state.va.us/whosmy.nsf/main?openform

Please take a few minutes to do this, even if you think you live in the district of someone who will certainly vote for it.  It would be a shame to get so close to success, yet lose because of a bit of complacency.

So You Think You Can Be President?

By

On January 15, 2010

In Law, Policy, Politics

While this was made last October, I just saw it for the first time at Wednesday’s World’s Fair Use Day confab.  An excellent illustration of the power of using popular culture as a political critique.  Check it out:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oGPbbUT26c[/youtube]

Page 4 of 27

Previous

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén