Librarians shredding contact documents

People are confusing public policy with Constitutional rights.

Do I like the fact that the FBI might investigate what books people buy, what books they check out at the library, or what internet sites they visit at the library? Not necessarily - there's a clear potential for abuse. But is it unconstitutional? Probably not. Protection of that information would probably require an act of Congress. However, if I'm mistaken about this, I'd be happy to hear from someone with more info.

Why do you insist on focusing on tracking web sites visited? Nothing of the sort is proposed. I suspect you fear some sort of tracking of your own web habits, but that's a debate for another thread.

You want a possible reason? - Here's a few...

1: An investigation determines that child porn is being distributed over the internet from a library-hosted ip address.

2: An investigation determines that a participant in an internet credit card fraud scheme did much of his/her work from a library-hosted ip address.

3: An investigation determines that plans to blow up a building are being communicated online, and one of the terminals has a - you guessed it - library-hosted ip address.

Where does the investigation go from here? Nowhere - because the library doesn't keep records. Instead of having a list of 5-10 people who were on the terminals at that time, the investigators have nothing.

For a tax-dollar-funded entity, this is unacceptable, and provides clear cover for anyone wishing to use a computer to commit crimes.

-----------

Wow, I can only wish I lived in your paranoia filled world where every person is a potential terrorist. When I worked at the library there were basically two types of people who used the comps, those looking for a job, and old people doing geneology research.

I didn't get to experience a single FBI raid or sting operation

Seems to me that you're the paranoid one. People looking for a job or doing geneology research would have no problems signing in at the desk before using the library computer.

Those who have problems with this are those who fear they may be caught doing something illegal or immoral.

Nope...I'm not paranoid. My cable provider has my name, and they know my ip address, and if in a library, I'll gladly sign in to use the internet. I have absolutely nothing to hide.

Nothing Government Provided is free. NOTHING.

If the librarians really wanted to hide the documents, they could just file them using the Dewey Decimal System...

OK. THAT...was funny.

Better not seal those enelopes, then, only people doing immoral things like sending anthrax seal envelopes.

Have a camera installed in your bedroom, too. Do you know how many instances of child rape occurr in bedrooms every year? After all, you would only want to hide it if you were doing something illegal.

You also cannot be trusted to be alone with any child anywhere, you might be forcing them to pose for child porn.

Those bathroom stalls.. Gotta go. How do we know you aren't looking at kiddie porn in there? Or shooting up with heroine?

Lose the clothes, too. After all, how do we know you don't have a nuclear suitcase bomb, or a vial of VX hidden if you aren't naked?

You can add body cavity searches for concealed vials of sarin whenever you go in to a public place.

I've got a better idea. Upon finding out about criminal acts tracing back to a library IP, law enforcement enforms the library discreetly, and interviews librarians, to set up a sting. That way, people maintain their rights to privacy (there are things which are embarrassing which aren't illegal after all, don't enforce your immodesty on the rest of us), and the criminals can get caught. They can reasonably expect the cooperation of the entire library system in looking for specific criminals, upon production of some sort of legal documentation, I'd wager.

BlackGriffen

You may feel paranoid due to your activities, but law-abiding, library internet users have nothing to fear.

If you need to committ computer crimes, it's not going to be with taxpayer-funded resources that provide anonymousness.

So the loss of privacy is nothing to fear?

Sorry, but I can only roll my eyes.

Odd. The assumption is, then, if I want privacy, I must be hiding something? If I need privacy, I must be committing a crime? Huh.

Good thing the laws of this country (currently) don't agree with you.

You can have privacy in your own home. The library is a public place.

I see. I am only entitled to privacy in my own home? Once again, good thing the (current) laws of this country do not agree.

You should have a certain expectation of privacy at most times.

Doctor/patient
Lawyer/client

So much so that there is now a 10 page form that everyone in my wife's office (patients and employees) have to fill out in order to verify said privacy, which is implied anyway.

(The above is not intended to say that those listed relationships are the exclusive places where one should have an expectation of privacy.)

Yes, and I expect the state to respect that as much as possible.
If I borrow a book from a public library, I understand they have to record my name so that they can check if I returned it. But after I returned the book there is no good reason why the records shouldn't be shredded.
If I read the book within the public library, there is no good reason why my name should be recorded at all.

And no, criminal prosecution is not a good reason to keep track of people's reading habits. I have never heard of a crime prepared in a public library, let alone cleared up.