184 Do you feel these two bills are needed?

Comments

Tom Garrett 1 year, 5 months ago

HB 2469 and HB 2165 are bills which are intended to protect your privacy.

The Senate Committee on Government and Environment approved HB 2469 to require state agencies that have data with personal information to encrypt that information. Such a move would make it more difficult for a hacker who has gained access to the computer to actually use what he finds.

The same panel also voted to update existing laws designed to protect the records of what people borrow from public libraries. HB 2165 extends that to e-books.

Both bills have already been approved by the House and now go to the full Senate.

How do you feel about these bills? Are they needed?

0

Tom Garrett 1 year, 5 months ago

How much would it worry you if--say--ADOT were hacked and your information was part of what was taken?

0

Bernice Winandy 1 year, 5 months ago

I think the information should be encrypted. Think of all the havoc that was caused by someone breaking into the Bashas' system. Getting driver's nformation would be far more dangerous as identity theft becomes very possible.

0

Pat Randall 1 year, 5 months ago

With all the information we have to give at a Drs office that is the easiest place for identity theft. Now it is mostly on computers connected to hospitals and other drs.

  THINK ABOUT THAT FOR AWHILE.
0

Kim Chittick 1 year, 5 months ago

Pat is exactly correct!!!

Furthermore, a couple of weeks ago I had the pleasure of an overnight stay in the hospital. At one point while there, I overheard a patient in the next room being questioned. One question that shook me to my core..."do you have guns in your house?"

Is it already starting?

0

Pat Randall 1 year, 5 months ago

Kim, We do not have to answer the question about the gun or a lot of others that are on thier forms. I stopped checking the Indian, black, white or whatever. I check the block that says other. One time where it says sex. I wrote occacsionaly. Probably no one noticed. The people that read the forms are not to smart anyway. It asks your birthdate and the square next to it asks your age. Can't they figure something that simple? If they do read them a year later the age isn't right anyway.

I would like to see the papers the schools have the kids fill out that parents never see. if you ask for them, they won't give them to you or at least it was that way in Mesa. I told my kids not to fill out anything unless I saw it first. I didn't have anything to hide, but I don't think the school has the right to pry into parents business. I know I am off the subject again but schools are there to teach the 3 Rs. Not poke thier nose in my business.

0

Tom Garrett 1 year, 5 months ago

Pat,

You, and Bernice, and Kim are exactly on the subject. Yes, the data should be encrypted to make it more difficult fornsome hacker to make use of it, but what is more important is that a lot of that information should not be there in the first place.

That one about "do you have guns in your house?" shook me up. How is that the business of the hospital?

Man! I hate saying this because it always ends up being a problem, but we need some kind of blanket laws regarding what can be asked.

We have a simple 1st Amendment law that says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Maybe we need one that says, "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of privacy."

I'd vote for that one.

After all the wrangling over what it means, it would end up meaning that you could only be asked questions you should be asked.

Here's one way that it could be interpreted in a particular circumstance: You are handed a form in a doctor's office. Any question on that form that is not a matter of medical necessity or required for billing purposes is printed in blue; answering it is voluntary.

It would also beyond a doubt be interpreted as barring any and all questions concerning any right covered by the Bill of Rights.

It is time!

We need written, constitutionally sound, protection of the right to privacy. Too many companies are trying to gather information on us so they can make money, and too many government agencies are trying to gather information on us so they can control us.

It is time to act!

0

Kim Chittick 1 year, 5 months ago

Tom, I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist, however, I am told that the "guns in the house" question at the hospital is a link through, or by, or because of, Obamacare; and the answers to those irrelevant (medically anyway) questions are all linked to a "main file" that the government keeps on all citizens.

Relevant to nothing, a couple of years ago, I tripped down our front steps and hubby insisted that I get my grossly bruised and swollen ankle x-rayed. They brought us in to a small office where they asked all the questions. One of which was, "do you feel safe at home?" I found it amusing that they asked that question with my husband sitting right there. Of course,I am fine at home, however, if a woman was not safe at home, would she really say it in front of her husband pr partner?

Finally, even though at times it makes me seem like a...uummm...grouchy old lady, many questions I answer with "not relevant" or "none of your business". If it is not necessary medically, I will not answer it.

You are right, IT IS TIME TO STAND FOR WHAT WE BELIEVE IN!!!!!

0

Tom Garrett 1 year, 5 months ago

"Do you feel safe at home?"

"Do you have any guns in your house?"

When the federal government starts collecting data on honest law abiding citizens it isn't because they want to send out awards.

And I agree with you, Kim. I do not answer questions that are not directly tied to whatever I am doing. I simply ignore them.

As it is, you would not believe the amount of information I can go out on the internet and bring up on someone. It is downright scary. I have sent a long e-mail to the Tea Party asking them to consider whether or not they should make personal privacy a major issue in the next national election. I think it should. It seems to me that the Obama administration is hell bent on collecting as much information on all of us as it can, and I believe we either end it right now or it will be too late.

Look at it this way:

The 1st Amendment protects our right of free speech, but isn't that just the other side of the coin that says that NOT speaking is also a fundamental right? You are no longer free to speak when your right to remain silent about your personal and private life is open to the goverment. Why? Because the minute you speak they know about it, and knowing about it they can--and do--target you.

Look at what that newspaper in New York did. As a punishment for citizens who dared to apply for a license to own a firearm, they published the names of everyone who had one, knowing full well that it would target those people. That online report actually had little dots on the screen where you could click and get the data on the person who lived there. Think of where that placed policemen who had arrested some creep; now both they and their families were targets. How hard would it be for some creep to take out a child on its way to school in revenge? Or to watch for a house to empty and torch it?

Privacy is an absolute right, as basic as the rest of our rights. the only reason our forefathers didn't include it in the Bill of Rights is that they could not possibly foresee the mess we have today. The goverment is ours, but only if we take it back from those who would control us, shape us, turn us into what they want us to be.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.