Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!



U.S. Supreme Court: Public Anonymity No Right

dkemist Re:Name only, not ID, serial number, or anything e (1492 comments)

I did watch the video. Admittedly, some of the "big man" stuff does sound a bit like a power trip by the big.... but it still doesn't see too extreme. I mean, once this goes on for a while and the guy is refusing to identify himself, the cop is just getting more suspicious -- right or wrong -- that's obviously what's happening. As the majority opinion stated, the amount an individual gives up by identifying him or herself is miniscule compared to what an investigator learns by identifying that individual. It's similar to the amount of "free speech" I give up by not being able to shout "fire" in a crowded place if there isn't really a fire.

Now, my general concern is that the police take it as a license to start identifying people on their way out of opposition political meetings and the like, but I think that the majority opinion is worded quite clearly such that the verdict is only on identification during the course of an existing criminal investigation....

more than 10 years ago


dkemist hasn't submitted any stories.


dkemist has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?