Not difficult to understand, and most would agree that 
those responsible should be held to account for their 
crimes (I think). 

But what is the "responsible way" to distribute this 
software? This software isn't "sold" to anybody (that 
I'm aware of) and there is no central authority 
responsible for regulating it. Who should and how 
should they do it? Are these software the new 
"munitions" (like encryption software)? What 
capabilities would get a piece of software 
classified as such? Who does get to see these 
software and what qualifications will be 
required of them? There are many such 
questions and grey areas in this debate, and few 
good answers (that I have heard).

You may not have said "ban" the software, but 
the "blaming the tools" approach starts you off 
down that road. I agree with the "bad things 
should happen to those bad people who do 
that bad stuff", but the "bad tools should 
be controlled" needs more and better 
explanation. Unless you want to get the 
feedback that comes along (like baggage) 
with that topic.

A happy day to you,

Troy

>>> smac at visi.com 10/22/03 02:54PM >>>
I did not say to "ban" the software.
I said it's irresponsible do distribute it in the way they are doing 
it.  I said the people who use it for evil piss-me-off.
 
We need the tools but we don't "LEGALLY" sell guns to criminals or 
minors.  We require minors to be educated about guns if they will use 
them for sport shooting. 


_______________________________________________
TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org
https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list