Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Unabomber Property Up For Creepy Online Auction

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the own-a-piece-of-crazy dept.

The Internet 109

coondoggie writes "Ok this is kind of creepy. The US Marshalls Office today said it will hold an online auction of the personal effects of the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski. The auction will run until June 2 and will include personal documents, such as driver's licenses, birth certificates, deeds, checks, academic transcripts, photos, and his handwritten codes; typewriters; tools; clothing; watches; several hundred books; and more than 20,000 pages of written documents, including the original handwritten and typewritten versions of the 'Unabom Manifesto.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Not creepy but smart, (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36264698)

Identifying people who are interested in this stuff is good, getting them to pay money to identify themselves is genius.

Re:Not creepy but smart, (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36264892)

Stupid question, but... will Unabomber fans be sending their payment in by mail?

Re:Not creepy but smart, (1)

repka (1102731) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265024)

Free registration in nationwide creeps database included!

Fruad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36264780)

"driver's licenses, birth certificates, deeds, checks, academic transcripts"

Can we say fraud and violation of federal law?

Re:Fruad (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36264832)

What do you expect from a government that doesn't care about you, your rights, or the constitution?

Re:Fruad (aka fraud) (1)

fredrated (639554) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265464)

Telll me something, exactly how does a government care or not care?

Re:Fruad (aka fraud) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266150)

"Telll me something, exactly how does a government care or not care?"

Idiots like you who make useless smartass comments which contribute
nothing to the discussion are always so predictably present in the web-based
forums which are so common these days. In the old days of Usenet, there weren't
nearly so many idiots like you, and damn I miss those days.

Now, on to the simple-minded question you posed :
The government would exhibit caring by not allowing things like the PATRIOT act to
exist.

Of course, the truth is that the government which now exists in the US is edging
ever closer to what rational people would term "fascist", and no such caring
seems to exist in the majority of the US government. And useless fools like
Mr. Smartass are idly standing by while it all happens.

Re:Fruad (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36264924)

I am disturbed by this as well. Unless Ted Kacynkski signed a waiver to allow the government to auction off what can be considered private records, I don't see how the government should be allowed to do this. Selling off other property to pay restitution to his victims, I don't have a problem with.

Re:Fruad (0)

hondo77 (324058) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265090)

From TFA:

Proceeds from the auction will be used to compensate Kaczynski's victims.

Re:Fraud (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265152)

Selling off other property to pay restitution to his victims, I don't have a problem with.

None of those things are private (1)

name_already_taken (540581) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265844)

I am disturbed by this as well. Unless Ted Kacynkski signed a waiver to allow the government to auction off what can be considered private records, I don't see how the government should be allowed to do this. Selling off other property to pay restitution to his victims, I don't have a problem with.

As long as you're not a criminal, you don't have to worry about it too much. The government can't take your stuff away and sell it unless you cause them to by, for example, mailing bombs to innocent victims.

None of the items mentioned can be considered private records. Driver's licenses, birth certificates, deeds, and academic transcripts are publicly accessible anyway, even before they become evidence in a criminal trial.

The other items became public information or government property once they were entered into evidence in the court proceedings against him, unless Kaczynski's attorney won a court order to have the evidence sealed or to have the items returned to him - which he didn't.

Re:None of those things are private (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266148)

As long as you're not a criminal, you don't have to worry about it too much. The government can't take your stuff away and sell it unless you cause them to by, for example, mailing bombs to innocent victims

perhaps unsurprisingly, 80% of the assets seized in the 1990s were seized from people who were never charged with a crime.

Re:None of those things are private (3, Interesting)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266242)

None of the items mentioned can be considered private records. Driver's licenses, birth certificates, deeds, and academic transcripts are publicly accessible anyway, even before they become evidence in a criminal trial.

Birth certificates and academic transcripts are considered private. Except for immediate families of the person but I can assure you that you cannot get these records of individuals from the state. That was part of the BS of the whole Birther controversy with Birthers complaining that somehow Hawaii was making an exception for Obama when it is clear in all states that birth certificates are not public records.

The other items became public information or government property once they were entered into evidence in the court proceedings against him, unless Kaczynski's attorney won a court order to have the evidence sealed or to have the items returned to him - which he didn't.

The existence of property held by the state does not automatically make a piece of property eligible for public viewing. In the many cases, all the state did was to list the property as in their possession as required by law; the state did not list the contents (or make it available to the public) especially if the piece of evidence was not used at trial.

Re:None of those things are private (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 3 years ago | (#36267366)

As long as you're not a criminal, you don't have to worry about it too much. The government can't take your stuff away and sell it unless you cause them to by, for example, mailing bombs to innocent victims.

Its already been decided by the courts, that if a state wants to sell your property to a mall developer, they can seize it from you and you can do nothing about it. So why would you think that the federal government would grant themselves less power?

Re:Fruad (1)

SockPuppetOfTheWeek (1910282) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265378)

Handy rule-of-thumb for would-be fraudsters: avoid using names of famous, infamous, or fictitious people. It makes you rather conspicuous.

Re:Fruad (1)

secretcurse (1266724) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266106)

I think it would be awesome to use his driver's license at the liquor store...

Re:Fruad (1)

billcopc (196330) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266804)

You've clearly never signed up for something with a fake name. Today's CS reps, even government staff, are so freakin' ignorant, they actually believe any name you give them.

I've a few friends who get a kick out of doing just that, registering phones, government services, and in one epic stunt a complete set of ID using celebrity or made-up names including:

- Pablo Escobar
- Cosmo Kramer
- LaToya Jackson
- William Shatner
- Tony Montana
- Travis Bickle
- Buck Futter
- Ron Jeremy
- Charles Manson

Whether you attribute these slip-ups to apathy or cultural differences, the fact remains that it is too damned easy to fake one's identity. Your friends will get a chuckle, but no respectable public servant would dare challenge a funny name on your driver's licence - well, except maybe a cocky police officer, but hey I did say "respectable"...

In your face (1)

creat3d (1489345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36264826)

"We will use the technology that Kaczynski railed against in his various manifestos to sell artifacts of his life. [...]" said U.S. Marshal Albert Nájera of the Eastern District of California in a statement.

Re:In your face (5, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36264886)

I'm certain that watching the state sneeringly auction off his personal effects on the internet from his cage for the amusement of the crowd will serve as a devastating rebuke to his thesis that technology inevitably tightens its grip on the individual and drives them to ever shallower and more inauthentic attempts at activity.

I find the guy's terrorist activities deeply distasteful, and he certainly deserves to rot in jail for them; but as a theorist of the sociology of technological advance, he is actually pretty underrated...

Re:In your face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265146)

I started reading his manifesto when it was printed in The Washington Post. I distinctly remember being fascinated by his theories, right up to the part where he actually used the phrase "kill people". That shocked me back to reality.

Re:In your face (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265216)

As they say, the gap between genius is madness is a very short one. I think Kaczynski is as good an example of that as I've ever seen. Brilliant guy who, unfortunately, didn't have the mental balance or the inner voice to tell him that you have to remain at least somewhat pragmatic and should never take an ideology too far. The only difference between him and, say Lenin or Mao, is that he was a lone nut job in a cabin and not the leader of a mass revolution, and thus was only able to cause a small amount of death and mayhem.

Re:In your face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265390)

you have to remain at least somewhat pragmatic and should never take an ideology too far

What if my ideology is to never kill people for fun? Do you think I shouldn't take that too far? Should I kill people for fun sometimes? Trying to offer pragmatism and ideology in the way you are doesn't make much sense. I think pragmatism is basically a cop out. You're saying, "I know it's wrong but I feel compelled to do it anyways".

Re:In your face (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265512)

Pragmatism means never assuming your ideological assumptions are absolutely right, and allowing yourself to compromise. You call it a cop-out, I call out a corollary to Asimov's famous axiom "Never let your sense of morality prevent you from doing what's right."

Re:In your face (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265432)

I'd still like to have his typewriter. I got some, erm, ideas, to type up....

Re:In your face (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266180)

I'm not sure I agree with this. You have to look at the greater picture. I don't think the state should harm people. At the same time I would agree with someone who says it is a necessity at times. The problem is it is almost never today a necessity. It is thus an abuse of the privilege. For instance we need not murder people who have committed acts which we consider to be atrocities. I'm talking about people like Saddam, Bin Laden, and other revolutionaries. This includes mass murders, kiddie murders, and other criminals who face the death penalty.

Society would be better served by restraint. In practice what we do is seek revenge. Our prisons are full of some awful individuals and not-so-bad. Both society and all those restrained in prisons should be protected from each other and at the same time we should avoid taking away the liberties of such offenders. This is revenge and not beneficial to society. If the past restraint of moment is not enough to stop someone who has been returned to society from breaking the rules then further actions are unlikely to protect society anyway. Restraints that go no farther than necessary should be employed. Prisons should be as least confining as feasible and contain as few as is absolutely necessary to protect society. Society does not need to lock up every pot grower or individual who has unintentionally caused death. Certainly other means of discouragement can be employed to prevent such occurrences from happening again if it is likely to occur again (think drunk drivers- a drunk driver who continues to break the law or who has killed may have a vehicle impounded-and later locked up if further actions are necessity).

There are probably zero revolutions which have ever happened without at least a handful of deaths. Those who are willing to murder may need to be restrained by society. They should not be locked up any longer than necessary or executed. This is a violation of societies rights and those who take such actions are the ones who are defending such societies from governments whom have taken things too far. They also have the most to lose (restraint of freedom and possible death). Just because most don't agree doesn't justify revenge. The Unabomber may just have acted too early. I'm not going to defend his position. I very much enjoy and support technology. Only the rights which were taken away from society by imprisoning him. When he was locked up so were the right of the people to a revolution and to overthrow the government.

His attempt was in vain. His actions were unspoorted. The way he went about them were probably wrong. Then again- he was the one with the disadvantage so who is to say what method he could have employed that would have worked better. He certainly did accomplish something. Allot of people read his writings. Something that would have been unlikely had he carried out any other activities in an attempt to revolution.

Re:In your face (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266220)

He failed in part because he was a loner and in part because no one wants a revolution. No matter what anybody says, one man cannot create a revolution. The conditions have to be there. A single man can be the spark, but someone else has to have to spilled the gasoline.

Re:In your face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266586)

"...because no one wants a revolution"

What a comical and absurd attempt to define the desires
of others, most of whom you will never know.

And by the way, you dumb shit, you're wrong.

Re:In your face (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266686)

Well, thanks for that incredibly critique. The only thing missing is you flinging shit around. Well, maybe you are. You sound like the type.

Re:In your face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266336)

" The only difference between him and, say Lenin or Mao, is that he was a lone nut job in a cabin and not the leader of a mass revolution, and thus was only able to cause a small amount of death and mayhem."

You might include people like Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, and G.W. Bush in your above list. Why ? Because they all engaged in wars for which the basic
justification was a goddamned lie fabricated by the government, which they KNEW was a lie, and those wars killed quite a few people. How is this
any less psychotic than actions of the Unabomber ? The answer is that it is no less psychotic, unless you allow that same government to tell you what to think
about its conduct in which case you would think what the government told you to think.

Go look at the Viet Nam memorial wall in Washington D.C., and notice the record of over 40,000 dead inscribed on that granite. If you are a rational
human being you will see that the Unabomber, while being a sick and deeply troubled person who engaged in inappropriate violence, was
a rank amateur compared to the pros in the US military-industrial complex. And if you are intelligent as well as rational, this reality will be far more troubling
to you than the existence of a lone crazy guy.

Re:In your face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265420)

I have to agree. This one is going to blow up in the US Marshal's office face, figuratively speaking. It comes off as petty.

Re:In your face (1)

luis_a_espinal (1810296) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265690)

I have to agree. This one is going to blow up in the US Marshal's office face, figuratively speaking. It comes off as petty.

They are going to use the proceedings to compensate the victims. How's that petty?

Re:In your face (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265860)

I like your irony there. However, it's ok to laugh at some people in cages. ;)

Re:In your face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266290)

In New York City, a guy could pay ten bucks to watch two cops have sex in a cage.

In your face? (1)

scrccrcr (1985186) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266388)

Your words make sense, but when you criticise His actions you indeed support the system (which is bad) by not committing yourself to a serious position against the bad,horrible system (because you can just brush that aside for the sake of some leftist ideal like how everyone deserves to live (like glen beck)). You can't separate the good from the bad -- unless, of course, you want to get laid and get paid. The system will appreciate such weakness. The system appreciates the same weakness in the women,children of conquered nations (hint: they are less likely to try to stop Your attempts to 'stabilize' their region and bomb it with Your democracy). Not everyone is okay with being a domesticated dog. Soon, when the population of more 'intelligent people' (i.e., those who are not willing to hand the world over to you excessive progeny) increases, it will no longer be possible for the system that you support to effectively handle dissent individually. When that happens, the human race evolutionary experiment will be complete.

Re:In your face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266806)

"I find the guy's terrorist activities deeply distasteful, and he certainly deserves to rot in jail for them; but as a theorist of the sociology of technological advance, he is actually pretty underrated..."

He's the type example of his own theories, having resorted to both technology and violence in attempt to draw attention to his ideas, and having foolishly given out to the technologically-enabled mass media all the information necessary for people to recognize who he was and to catch him. I mean, seriously, he's against technology and the effect it has on people, but built bombs and sent them to innocent people to maim and kill them? He's one gigantic example of hypocrisy and failure and I don't think his ideas deserve any rating at all. I read his "manifesto". It didn't seem particularly novel or insightful to me.

If I had the money I'd be tempted to buy the stuff and dispose of it somewhere it might do some good, such as an organic landfill or the metal recycling plant depending upon the type of material. It doesn't deserve any attention other than the money it could generate to help the people whose lives he harmed.

fuzzyfuzzyfungus is an idiot. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36267180)

you are jealous because he was willing to do something, and you get to watch. Shockingly I find that the In-Personam jurisprudence is reffering to the auction as "personal effects of the Unabomber" rather than that of his legal name in forfeiture.

You see, people like you create all kinds of jurisdictional loop-holes whereas rather than hold a murderer accountable at County Court you get all these jurisdictional nightmare spaghetti code courts that makes it impractical and impossible for a regular murderer to defend theirself as to the causes impelling them, and thus any reason can be assumed as to the motivation by the sitting Trustee and thereby pave the way for more legislation to expand the micro-management state within the federal Statehood.

Rather than hold a murderer accountable for their actions, they parade them up and down the streets as the guiding light for more government jurisprudence to overlay upon everyone: now you get the Unabomber-like suspicions, because that is what the government said is similar in the psychological profile of the Unabomber. Notice how the Unabomber and the 9/11 Demoli^H^H^H^HHijackers all had Birth Certificates and Driver Licenses and Passports that randomly survived the fireball to be recovered on the NY streets at the bases of the implo^H^H^H^H collapsed Twin Towers. Now you are under suspicion of being linked to those TOURI^H^H^H^HTerrorists because you have something in common. Maybe because they have short haircuts and a blank patient stare on your photo while you aren't as patient face-to-face. And what's worse, all those government ID's can be your new gateway for identity fraud: someone can find them, after snooping your security tokens, and automate your person committing virtual unlawful activities, and you can't do anything about abating the presumption from within a jail cell. Now you know how the 9/11 TOUR^H^H^H^HTerrorists felt when many of them were still alive and well in Brittain being ignored by the American MEDIA about how they didn't commit those acts and that their United States identities had been stolen and mis-used in their absence.

Re:In your face (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36268424)

Dude didn't think that throwing bombs was an inauthentic attempt at political speech enabled by technology?

Or was his point that we should regress even beyond the invention of explosives, or maybe fire?

Dude was a nutter. Nothing he said is credible, no matter how closely it might randomly match sapient expression.

Re:In your face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36264950)

Jokes on us.
We're gonna spend more money than he ever had... Or value he ever destroyed... To keep him locked up forever.

This somehow makes us 'right' and him 'wrong'.

Idk... i think he kind of won this one. HE has healthcare at least.

Re:In your face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265348)

He gets groped less than the average air traveler too.

Re:In your face (1, Insightful)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36264996)

"If we urinate on the Koran, it makes us more right," said US Marshal Albert Nájera of the Eastern District of California in a statement.

Creepy (1)

Dan East (318230) | more than 3 years ago | (#36264848)

So what's the deal? He was hoarding Halloween decorations and stuff too?

That's a gorgeous typewriter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36264856)

I don't care who you are, that's a nice-looking typewriter right thar.

creepy is right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36264906)

I don't think this should be auctioned, rather I think it should be donated to a historical archive/library/etc.
Making money off a madman/criminal seems wrong.

Re:creepy is right (1)

guybrush3pwood (1579937) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265144)

Why? Please elaborate.

Re:creepy is right (1)

luis_a_espinal (1810296) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265724)

Why? Please elaborate.

AC seems to be entangled with the is/ought problem [wikipedia.org] while riding a high horse ;)

Re:creepy is right (1)

MDillenbeck (1739920) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266244)

I agree with the poster that scored low. I think the Unabomber is of historical and academic interest, and that his resources should be put into a format to be used by academics who wish to do further research on this historically significant figure. By auctioning off the items to a private party who will gain exclusive ownership rights, we are commercializing the relevant historical documents and restricting who can have access to them. I guess the question is this: do you feel ownership of information about historical figures should be a private property to be bought and sold, or should a figure who impacted society in general have the information about them available in a open source manner - or is there another alternative I did not think about?

Re:creepy is right (1)

guybrush3pwood (1579937) | more than 3 years ago | (#36267338)

What I think is that this douche is not an historical figure. He's a plain-old contemporary criminal, though famous. Nothing more, nothing else. His shit is of no value outside criminal records and the sensationalist press. The content of his papers can be digitalized and the actual papers burned. Nothing of value is lost. If someone wants to make a buck out of that crap, and someone is crazy enough to pay for it... they're all welcome to it.

Re:creepy is right (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265220)

Making money off a madman/criminal seems wrong.

And by "making money off of a madman/criminal" you mean selling his stuff to pay restitution to his victims, right? I see nothing wrong with that.

Re:creepy is right (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265236)

as opposed to spending money preserving the memory and legacy of a madman, which is SO right.

Re:creepy is right (1)

lexsird (1208192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265568)

Where its seriously wrong is its a reinforcement of the personification of a villain who has creepy people who idolize this sort of behavior. This shit should have all ended up in a dumpster some place instead of glorified like this. I would think the victims would recoil in horror at being giving money from creeps who idolize this guy and his stuff. It seems like a slap in the face, if the victims need money, shouldn't someone have helped them by now instead of waiting for this creepy auction to bear fruit?

What this says to future psychopaths is hey, you will be famous and even your crap will become valuable like some weird rock star. Its not only creepy, but I think its highly irresponsible behavior on behalf of authorities. Taunting the criminally insane doesn't seem very wise either. What if the next one decides to ratchet the stakes up out of spite and give us all something to really whine about.

Re:creepy is right (1)

uncqual (836337) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266186)

And would this also apply to Bernie Madoff's possessions?

I don't see a difference. Both should be sold with the proceeds going to the victims or to the government to help defray the cost of keeping them in prison for the rest of their lives.

Obviously if a museum wanted them, they could bid on them.

What? (1)

CheerfulMacFanboy (1900788) | more than 3 years ago | (#36264926)

No bombs? At least plans?

Killer Paraphernalia (1)

retroworks (652802) | more than 3 years ago | (#36264942)

History Channel should start running "American Pickers" and "Pawn Stars" episodes on murderer paraphernalia. Maybe do an episode on the auction from Bin Laden's TV, shawl and porn stash. Lee Harvey O's toybox. Eventually, America's supply side could glut the market.

Re:Killer Paraphernalia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266010)

A friend's parents lived down the road from the Heaven's Gate compound and when that stuff went up for auction, they bought enough of it to fill up a 2 stall garage with the intent of selling it on ebay. Apparently, they've made a profit on it, but still have a lot of it left.

Was Ted Kaczynski Really the Unabomber? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265036)

Look at a photo of Weird Al and then look at the sketch of the unabomber. Don't they look completely alike?http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2009/3/3/128806070439165640.jpg

Montana Property (3, Insightful)

ISoldat53 (977164) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265094)

Too bad the Montana property isn't included. It's in a pretty part of the state.

Re:Montana Property (3, Informative)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266240)

Kaczynski's Montana property was sold last year. This is an auction of personal property, probably the items that were seized from the cabin as evidence.

Slashdot: nerd news up to the minute... (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265148)

...too bad CNN has been crying about the Kacynkski auction for 2 WEEKS now.

Not only behind... 2 weeks behind.

Re:Slashdot: nerd news up to the minute... (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265242)

Only two weeks behind? That's not bad for Slashdot. We've had stories posted based off blog postings that have been anywhere from 6 months to more than a year old by the time it hit Slashdot.

Re:Slashdot: nerd news up to the minute... (2)

ari_j (90255) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265438)

...too bad CNN has been crying about the Kacynkski auction for 2 WEEKS now.

Not only behind... 2 weeks behind.

The editors had to wait until someone blogged about it and then submitted his own blog article to the site.

Re:Slashdot: nerd news up to the minute... (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36268480)

all it takes is for enough ignorami to click the + button in the firehose. and there are a LOT of ignorami on /.

Identity (1)

ddusza (775603) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265196)

Now would it really be that bad if Ted's identity was 'stolen' this way (driver's license, birth cert, etc), as the story mentions?

Psychological Experiments (4, Interesting)

waterford0069 (580760) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265214)

What's sad about this is that Kaczynski was the subject of what I'll argue were some pretty wicked and unethical psychological experiments when he was in school - long before he ever became a danger to the world. Some have suggested that these experiments pushed him over the edge.

Re:Psychological Experiments (3, Insightful)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265618)

Actually the whole idea of this auction comes off a pretty crass and pathetic. The auctioning off of the personal affects of what was clearly a mentally disturbed individual, only claimed as sane by a very distorted US legal system (clearly his actions speak volumes about his lack of mental stability). It's looks like the US marshals office in all of it's jock strap douchiness is celebrating the failure of an ohh evil intellectual, "We will use the technology that Kaczynski railed against" speaks very much of petty jealously.

Celebrating the the turning of mentally unstable people into non-persons by denying them any personal affects is really petty.

Re:Psychological Experiments (1)

waterford0069 (580760) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265810)

Too True... the US system is about punishment. Many other countries systems are about Corrections (both punishment an rehabilitation)

Re:Psychological Experiments (3, Insightful)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266252)

It's looks like the US marshals office in all of it's jock strap douchiness is celebrating the failure of an ohh evil intellectual, "We will use the technology that Kaczynski railed against" speaks very much of petty jealously.

Nah, you're reading into it more than is there.
 

Celebrating the the turning of mentally unstable people into non-persons by denying them any personal affects is really petty.

Nah, it's standard practice to sell off items seized as part of law enforcement investigations/prosecutions. The only thing notable here is who the property once belonged to.

Re:Psychological Experiments (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265882)

Here's a link to what you referenced:

Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber
June 2000

http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2000/06/chase.htm

Re:Psychological Experiments (1)

seven of five (578993) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266732)

His father's suicide [jrank.org] didn't help much, either.

Re:Psychological Experiments (1)

waterford0069 (580760) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266978)

Yes... that was in 1990 - 12 years after he started his attacks in 1978

Is this legal? (1)

Gr33nJ3ll0 (1367543) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265224)

When did it become legal to auction of the property of convicted criminals? I understand we lost this right in drug cases, but terrorism now too?

Re:Is this legal? (1)

mattack2 (1165421) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265448)

What "right" are you talking about?

Isn't the auction to pay off a very very tiny fraction of the damage he has done to his victims? (e.g. medical bills for the survivors)

Re:Is this legal? (1)

Gr33nJ3ll0 (1367543) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265574)

I honestly don't know, hence the question. From what I can tell in the article, no rational for the auction of his personal property has been given. Was there also a civil trial that found him responsible for medical bills and such for the survivors?

Re:Is this legal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266384)

According to TFA, he owes $15 million in court-ordered restitution.

Re:Is this legal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266624)

Good point. Plus selling the driver license and the birth certificate of a person that's still alive?

Hoodie and glasses (1)

ukemike (956477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265360)

I want the hoodie and cop sunglasses from the famous police sketch.

It's a tarp! (1)

vawwyakr (1992390) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265364)

All buyers placed on theorist watch list.

Re:It's a tarp! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265850)

Um actually no it is not.

Just buy this terrorist's effects... (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265372)

Just buy this terrorist's effects...

...We promise that we will not add you to a watch list, and that they contain no tracking devices.

most should have been donated (2)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265398)

Most of these things should have been donated to psychology or criminology school, or similar scholastic endeavor.

Re:most should have been donated (1)

smellsofbikes (890263) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265594)

There's no shortage of psychos and crazies. What made Kaczinsky interesting was that he was a very smart psycho -- but even then, there are lots of those. All the interesting stuff he wrote is public record because it was used as evidence during the trial and published in the court proceedings. Ideally they'd sell all the stuff and use the proceeds to help repay medical costs/give disability benefits to the people he injured, but more likely they're going to use it to indirectly defray some of the cost of the trial and his ongoing incarceration.

Re:most should have been donated (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266518)

While the trial transcripts are freely available, the totality of the evidence would be hard to see without paying money. I have a solution for the ongoing cost of his incarceration, that costs less than 20 cents and makes a loud popping noise.

Re:most should have been donated (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 3 years ago | (#36267134)

A question was whether he really was crazy or not. Sure he's a criminal, but you don't have to be insane to kill people. Society doesn't like this though and is afraid of the idea of these awful acts like this being performed by rational people. Thus the quickly applied label of insanity, only a madman could act that way. So Oswald is insane, and McVeigh, and Kaczynski, and Osama.

The interesting thing about Kaczynski is that his writings are written very intelligently and rationally, no matter how much one disagrees with the contents. His manifesto is not a rambling diatribe only intelligible to others with similar thinking. And this is probably what is the scariest thought, the idea that there can exist rational monsters.

Re:most should have been donated (1)

parlancex (1322105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266230)

The proceeds from the auction are being donated to the families of the victims of the bombs to help pay the court ordered restitution that was initially handed down as part of Kaczynski's sentence. That's a pretty good cause I think, many of his victims had permanent damage that probably required a lot of time, pain, and money to undo, and even then only partially.

rubycodez is an idiot. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36267486)

you should be donated to a psychology or criminology school. What do you think you are going to prove? I would like to go into a deep enchanted forest to write a book while living among the creatures and creepy-crawlies, and I think I might need: a shed, typewriter, a hammock, potbelly stove, toiletpaper, toofbrush, and some self-defense tools that don't attract regulation to my exact position because I can't have any interruptions where I plan to perspire my inspirations into that book.

Me and the Unabomber are practically the same guy, and the only prosections are from regulations we were not aware of, because as you see nobody was taken to County Court for Murder but by REGULATIONS in some federal State courtroom where your defenses are only as good as your representatives convictions after seeing your confined countenance survive the juggernaut of incarceration and confinement in irregular clothing that makes you look like a mal-content Budhist.

Remember that everyone you see on Television is a celebrity, for government purposes of expanding interventions of micro-management onto the people by parading captured criminals (we know they're only accused but hnnnnn) for causes of new unrelated regulation to replace unused Enactments.

Not creepy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265414)

I wouldn't say creepy, I'd say it glorifies him that people want to collect his items. It's the sort of thing you do for a dead celeb.

People like that need to be forgotten and not given any attention.

Time for the Moron Decree (1)

hackertourist (2202674) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265476)

Instead of giving such criminals a name (or worse, a nickname), it's time we start referring to them as "Moron # (sequential number)" and generally not giving them the attention they crave. No more notoriety!

Re:Time for the Moron Decree (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36265808)

The thing is, Moron #2202674, someone already thought of that.

Creepy? What? (1)

EonsWrath (1888134) | more than 3 years ago | (#36265948)

To be honest, some of that stuff is creepy, but his written documents? That's cool, if i could get my hands on them that would be sweet. I love psychology of crazy humans. It's something very intriguing and interesting. Knowing how they function. I'm guessing people like me would buy such documents, and use it to identify other people who might try to do something similar. It is pretty freaky that they are selling his birth certificate

Terror porn anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266246)

Can't wait until they auction off Bin Laden's stuff.

Re:Terror porn anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266564)

Yuk - porn of sex with goats? You're sick.

US Marshals? (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266436)

Ok, quick question.

Why are the US Martials auctioning off his property? Doesn't it belong to his estate?

Re:US Marshals? (1)

devjoe (88696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266752)

His estate? He's not dead. He's still in prison. If you'd been watching the news recently you would have seen that they are now investigating him for the still unsolved 1982 Tylenol murders, and they asked him to submit a DNA sample for this investigation but he refused. (They may seek a court order to compel him to provide the DNA sample.) The auction is occurring because he's been ordered by the court to pay restitution to the families of the victims. The court judgement occurred in 2006. [sfgate.com] Ever since then he's been fighting against the auction of his possessions, but apparently it is actually going to go through now.

Freedom Club (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36266560)

Those who haven't read his works should temper their citicism of the man. Murder? That is the motto of our age and will not keep future historians from appreciating his unique genius.

I don't get it. (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266616)

What is a creepy online auction and how does it differ from a non-creepy one?

Kaczynski is a political prisoner (1)

br00tus (528477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36266640)

Some people here are saying Kaczynski is not psychologically competent. At the trial he was found to be competent by the government psychiatrist, if he were not found so he would not be in jail but a mental institution. Not that psychology is a real study outside of the biological portion (and a very small subset of social scientific experiments) anyhow.

Everybody who doesn't agree with the dominant power structure in the US, imperialistic capitalism, and the culture around it, is ultimately "insane". Sane is increasing the control of capitalism and its technology even more - leading to ever-increasing global warming, alienation and isolation, video cameras and the like everywhere and an increasing 1984 surveillance state etc.

Kaczynski got a PHd and was considered something of a math genius. He didn't like the rat race so he moved off to live in a rural area. So did J. D. Salinger and so have others. He just wanted to be left alone in the wilderness, not to be a puppet of modern wage slavery and capitalism, but capitalism's need to valorize itself necessitated the forests of Montana to be cut down, for airplane's traffic to increase more and more over his home and the like. So he mailed out bombs to a Commentary and Weekly Standard writer like David Gelernter, United Airlines president Percy Wood, a Burson-Marsteller executive like Thomas Mosser , timber lobbyist Gilbert Murray and so forth. These people are backed by the violent authority of the corporate-runned state so that they can exploit workers, dominate people and the like, Kaczynski simply used violence against the people he felt (rightly) were trying to interfere and dominate him, backed by the violent authority of the state.

The idle class elite is having the US government kill working people in Colombia, Iraq, Afghanistan and a host of other countries on a daily basis. This is considered good, sane and normal. Kaczynski knocking back at those he felt were forcibly dominating him is considered criminal and insane. Well, I guess its like that old St. Augustine story, the difference between a pirate and emperor is the size of his fleet. Predator drone attacks killing civilians weekly in Pakistan and Afghanistan is OK, Kaczynski maiming miserable pricks like Gelertner, and sleazy PR and corporate executives is "horrible".

One interesting note is why stopped. What happened is he found out there were others who believed as he did. In fact they were even more radical, although less militant. Kaczynski just wants to roll back the powers of the ruling class that have been gained since the Industrial Revolution, John Zerzan wants to roll back before the Agricultural Revolution of 10,000 years ago. While Kaczynski never went that far in ideology, he was certainly more militant than any of these people. I guess the logging and airline companies picked the wrong guy to log around and fly over.

Personally, I don't think Kaczynski is that great of a writer, you're better off reading some other primitivist literature to get an idea of what they're about. Much of it is by primitivists for primitivists, so even then it can be unintelligible if you're not steeped in it. Zerzan went from the 1960's Marxist left to a rejection of Marxism and into primitivism and anarchism. So you kind of need to be familiar with much of the Marxist canon, as well as the anarchist and primitivist canon, to really understand what he is saying. And how many people have that? Thankfully, *you* are a normal American, paying taxes so Predator drones can go kill people in rural Asia, not a crazy like Kaczynski who just wanted to live in the woods in peace.

Re:Kaczynski is a political prisoner (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36267588)

> ... airplane's traffic to increase more and more over his home and the like. So he mailed out bombs...

Yup, that's a totally sane and rational response to increased airplane fly-overs.

US is a stupid country. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36267994)

What's next? Auction Bin laden's porn collection?

I want the typewriter ... (1)

timothy (36799) | more than 3 years ago | (#36268306)

Not so much for itself, as for a font I would like to offer to the world for filling in any IRS forms.

Hmm. Perhaps someone has already done this, based on published exemplars?

timothy

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?