View Single Post
Old 08-01-2009, 05:22 AM   #7
Mattk
Regular User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 6,610
Default

I prefer to look at things in a more realistic setting. I've looked at the Department's privacy statement and it seems perfectly fine. But assuming you were looking harder and un-covered such unsavoury consequences, I still don't think it matters. So:

Being a prosecutor is generally a terrible job with compartively poor pay and limited prospects of career advancement. I highly doubt they will frivolously use obscure laws to prosecute people. It just makes you look like a jerk when you could be doing something else instead. Furthermore, they don't have any evidence unless an investigatory agency gives them some, upon which they will probably tell the investigator to leave them alone and get back to more important work. Then there is the question of why an investigator in a federal agency would bother to investigate random people under obscure laws. It doesn't accomplish a whole lot at all. So they won't. They will focus on more important offences.
__________________
One stumble does not constitute total failure;
One victory does not constitute total success.
Mattk is offline   Reply With Quote