> I mean if they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear, right?
You can't use that line on groups of people you don't like while also wanting privacy for groups of people you do like.
back
2 comments
I agree with your premise of equality - that you can't have it both ways. My point was if the government uses that power against its people, the people should be able to use that power against their government.
However in this case it's actually different, as police officers are meant to be public servants.
I disagree. People paid by the public must be accountable to the public and all their (paid) actions should not be private. (Exceptions may apply to this general rule, though they are debatable)
Yes, but you haven’t said whether you think this means that the names, photos and home addresses of all police should be made public.
Just because someone does public work doesn’t mean they should be denied a private life.
What do you suggest to do here? Either you allow the oppressors to beat people and stay anonymous, not get punished or you create a community trying to deanonymize them with all the consequences.
“not get punished”
Are you saying the goal of de-anonymizing is to punish the police?
Earlier it seemed like you were interested in trials: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24862054