🚀 go-pugleaf

	I'm a late comer to this discussion and possible have less at stake
here in terms of a position. (up till now) Here are some thoughts I would like
to share. Please keep in mind that I like you have my respective country's best
interest at heart and that I speak of my understanding of the intents of the
United States of America as one nation of people not of the current government
the people have elected.

	So to begin I think that the founding fathers sought to provide a place
where all persons could live and grow in coopration. To this aim a government
was formed.

	It was known that governments were composed at first of people who
understood the needs and aims and that as time went on the power of the
government would become more important than the aims those founders wished to
preserve for their children. They knew this through the study of not only their
parient country's history but of the many country, city-state and civilizations
that made up a classic education. For example they knew the history of Rome.
That Caesar was the title of a commanding general before it became the title of
the emperor of the Roman Empire.

	To prevent their aims from being lost my founding fathers created a
number of documents. The Constitution, later the Bill of Rights and the like.
Those words were intended to define the needs and aims of a good government for
the well being of the people who place themselves subject to their government.
To place limitations on the powers of that government as a safegaurd from the
all too present risks of even the best formed governments extensive power. And
to provide for the defense of the aims as defigned in the Constitution of that
government.

	One passage from the Pledge of Allegiance struck me as a youth as being
the true strength of my government. This passage requires me to protect my
country and the constitution for which it stands from all enemies, both foreign
and domestic.

	I think those who would give too much power to the government have not
said their pledge in a long time. It says that my country is fully behind the
aims of the Constitution and that I as a member of that country have been given
the duty to disolve the government by force if reguired when the government
becomes an enemy of the people who enacted the the Constitution. Implicit in
that duty is the call to those aims without regard to the laws the errant
government may have enacted or protections removed.

	To those ends my government is not allowed to prevent me from meeting
with others who may feel that the government has gone bad. I am allowed to keep
my COMMUNICATIONS private. In order to defend my country from a bad government
as well as other threats I am allowed to keep and bear arms.

	Now lets look at a more down to earth thoughts. First, no police person
is required to protect any specific individual at this time here in the USA.
Don't think so? Just try to sue for failure to protect. It does not work. The
role of the police is to preserve the communities peace, individual protection
is the right and responsibility of the individual.

	With that thought in mind. My government has no requirement to protect
an individuals right to privacy but must protect the masses right to privacy by
not allowing itself it wiretap for example and not allowing any other large
scale violation of an individuals right to privacy. To the end of individual
protection of the right to privacy the individual must secure that privacy
through any means available. The government must not prevent the individual
from using encryption to secure their right to privacy.

	Because my government is an extension of the people of my country, when
my government starts protecting itself from those very same people it must have
placed the government above the Constitution and the will of the people.
Suggestions like requiring the registration of encryption keys speak to how
close some parts of the US government has come to being for itself and not for
the people.

Regards, Ethan


NB. To all who read these words. I do not think that we have reached or are
even close to having a 'bad' government that needs to be removed by force as my
duty would require. I do think that there are some in the government who think
with less wisdom that our founding fathers and that in their very zeal to
protect the US way of life are in fact moving us closer to a repressive
government that the founding fathers and the Constitution seek to prevent. Be
it a police state, a military dictatorship (as was Augustus's rule) or as is a
real threat, a religious dictatorship.