User fees for wiretaps?
Babble on.
I'm all for law and order, and I don't have any problems with user fees. But this suggestion from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police misses the mark.
Wiretaps are an important crime-fighting tool, and they cost money. Someone needs to pay those costs - taxpayers, customers, or shareholders. I say it should be taxpayers. User fees are appropriate only where the benefits of the service accrue mostly to those users. I don't see that only phone company clients benefit from wiretaps.
The costs of wiretaps should come out tax revenues.
Babble off.
posted by Babbling Brooks @ 11:03 a.m.
3 comments
3 Comments:
Agreed. Cops should stick to their area of expertise. The suggested telephone subscriber fee would be backdoor TAX. Taxes must be legislated not surreptitiously imposed as "user" fees. ....Jake.
They can tap my e-mail and tax me for it, but good luck reading it. Blowfish encryption is a wonderful thing.
-- Sean (www.polspy.ca)
You're totally right, Damian. (As is Anonymous.) It's just a tax by another name, but people are taxed based on how many phone lines they have, which has no relationship to either ability to pay or the benefit received from law enforcement activities. Stupid idea.
Post a Comment
<< Home