Posted on 03/12/2016 5:10:52 AM PST by John W
AUSTIN -- President Obama defended government efforts to preserve law enforcement access to digital devices Friday, telling a crowd that included many technology innovators that society cannot end up "fetishizing our phones above every other value."
Obama made his remarks during a keynote discussion at the yearly South by Southwest Interactive conference here, after being asked by Texas Tribune journalist Evan Smith to comment on the larger implications of the pending fight between the FBI and Apple over access to an iPhone used by one of the shooters in December's terrorist attack in San Bernardino.
"The question we now have to ask is," he added, "if technologically it is possible to make an impenetrable device or system, or the encryption is so strong that there is no key, there is no door at all, then how do we apprehend the child pornographer? How do we solve or disrupt a terrorist plot? What mechanism do we have available even to do simple things like tax enforcement? ... There has to be some concession to the need to be able to get into that information somehow."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
POS
In other words, give up your digital privacy so Big Brother can take care of you. He’s here to help.
That's rich coming from a gay Muslim man who supports pedophile homosexuals who prey on young boys and Muslims who marry young girls and rape them...
Protection of secrets, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to encrypt information with private keys, shall not be infringed.
Yeah, I’m thinking it’s an absolute. The Founding Fathers would have enumerated it as such had they foreseen the government attempting to regulate “hard” encryption out of existence.
It’s okay for hildabeast to have privacy to give away government top secret information from a private server for money. It’s okay for a woman to kill her child - privacy, you know. It’s not okay for a serf to keep any information private from the government.
Is that the same Obama who grumped about giving up his BlackBerry upon taking office?
I guess that is why they are called 0bama phones.....
Child Porn scaremongering! On cue!
“For the children.”
The Founding Fathers did not fight for security but for freedom. As a part of the might British Empire they had all the safety and security they could dream of.
Bitterly clinging to their iPhones and lattes...
If it isn’t absolute, then the amount of “non-absoluteness” is determined by government only. Which means there are no restrictions at all.
"What mechanism do we have available even to do simple things like tax enforcement?"
I have a question... How did we do all these things before we had cell phones? Have we forgotten real police work?
Whenever someone says “The Constitution says that Congress shall not infringe on the right to bear arms” liberals say that those people are fetishizing guns and the second amendment.
Whenever someone says “The Constitution says that the right of the people to be secure against unreasonable searches shall not be violated” liberals say that those people are fetishizing their smartphones and the forth amendment.
But whenever a liberal says “it’s not in the Constitution, but unlimited abortion must be defended at all costs in all situations” they are a Constitutional scholar and their opinion can not be discussed or opposed.
Oh certainly they have a kitten when we ask if they might be, er, “fetishizing” abortion.
In other words; Give up your privacy, which was demanded when it was a woman’s “right” to an abortion, or queers right to “marry”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.