• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Encouraging doxxing of ICE offcers? What is wrong with people?

bomberfox said:
Taking pictures of public employees doing their jobs is not doxxing.
Click to expand...

Did you not read what I wrote?

Look for the word intent in my post above. Intent to harm, threaten by using identifying information by posting photos of said individuals online is doxxing.

ymmv
 
trixare4kids said:
Did you not read what I wrote?

Look for the word intent in my post above. Intent to harm, threaten by using identifying information by posting photos of said individuals online is doxxing.

ymmv
Click to expand...

no, it's posting photos.

Doxing would be tracing those photos back to the face they belong to and then publishing said info. Please learn your definitions. Otherwise posts like the one above are just silly statements.
 
bomberfox said:
The nazis selectively confiscated firearms from certain ethnicities. Man can trumpists be bigger ******s?
Click to expand...

Is that a yes, or a cop-out from answering the question?
 
bomberfox said:
No co-op. What the nazis did is not comparable to just any gun regulation.
Click to expand...

I never said it was, and you're still dodging the question.
 
bomberfox said:
I think its kinda obvious i was asking in relation to the specific claim made by the op.
Click to expand...
Ah. Silly me here I was thinking you were addressing the post you quoted :roll:
 
cpwill said:
Ah. Silly me here I was thinking you were addressing the post you quoted :roll:
Click to expand...

Why else did you bring up ISIS? To relate what they did to merely posting pictures of public employees.
 
bomberfox said:
Why else did you bring up ISIS?
Click to expand...

To drive home the point that doxxing is an inherently hostile act. The intent at best is to frighten and intimidate, and at worst to crowdsource violence against family members.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk
 
So, has anyone yet found a way to prove that snapping a picture is "doxing"?


I didn't think so.
 
cpwill said:
To drive home the point that doxxing is an inherently hostile act. The intent at best is to frighten and intimidate, and at worst to crowdsource violence against family members.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

This wasnt doxxing which is why i asked if the person in question released it. I do actually agree that doxxing (at least the way i use the term to separate from whistle blowing) is a hostile act. This is why i dont do it.
 
What is 'doxing'? (Yes, it is illegal!)

Also keep this in mind: doxing violates the terms of service of most legitimate online news / information / opinion sites.

Doxing is always illegal, whether it is done against a federal employee, a state employee, or a regular person. There are federal and state laws that specifically address doxing government employees. With regular citizens, doxing falls under various state criminal laws, such as stalking, cyberstalking, harassment, threats, and other such laws, depending on the state.




“Doxing“ is a legal term that means revealing “documents” about a person. This can range from revealing the name of a person who uses an alias, but more commonly refers to revealing whatever the person doing it feels will harm, shame, humiliate, endanger, or put the person at some risk. Doxing is a form of stalking or threatening and is illegal under many different federal and state laws, depending on the exact facts and location.

Revealing a “name” per se’ may, or may not be considered “Doxing” depending on the level of anticipated anonymity. However, in this law, the term “restricted personal information” means, “with respect to an individual, the Social Security number, the home address, home phone number, mobile phone number, personal email, or home fax number of, and identifiable to, that individual.” This is an important distinction to remember.

Once you outline the address or location of a person, within which a person can be placed at risk, YOU have VIOLATED THE LAW. PERIOD.

In all cases if you outline the physical location of any individual with the intent to harm, shame, stalk, humiliate, endanger, or otherwise compromise the safety and security of ANY individual you have placed that person in a position of risk and you are in violation of ALL State Stalking laws.

THIS is the most commonly crossed line.

However, in some cases, such as federal agents, or in Mark Osterman’s case his anonymity as a Federal Air Marshal, just revealing his name crosses the threshold for illegal activity.

I CAN FIND THOSE PIECES OF INFORMATION USING GOOGLE SEARCH. IS THAT STILL RESTRICTED? YES. It is illegal to announce or disseminate or post those listed pieces of information for the purposes listed in the law (18 USC § 119). Those are purposes such as threatening or intimidating or making it so others can harass or harm the person. This law is about acts that endanger the safety of or encourage attacks against a person or a person’s family. It is not about where you found the information.


The Illegal Activity of “Doxing”: Revealing “documents or personal information” about a person, without their permission, with the intent to Threaten, Harass, Intimidate, Shame, Humiliate or Place at Risk…. | The Last Refuge
 
My guess would be AG Barr will assign FBI agents to investigate any Doxxing of federal employees or their family.


18 U.S. Code § 119. Protection of individuals performing certain official duties

18 U.S. Code SS 119 - Protection of individuals performing certain official duties | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

(a)In General.—Whoever knowingly makes restricted personal information about a covered person, or a member of the immediate family of that covered person, publicly available—
(1) with the intent to threaten, intimidate, or incite the commission of a crime of violence against that covered person, or a member of the immediate family of that covered person; or
(2) with the intent and knowledge that the restricted personal information will be used to threaten, intimidate, or facilitate the commission of a crime of violence against that covered person, or a member of the immediate family of that covered person,
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(b)Definitions.—In this section—
(1) the term “restricted personal information” means, with respect to an individual, the Social Security number, the home address, home phone number, mobile phone number, personal email, or home fax number of, and identifiable to, that individual;
(2) the term “covered person” means—
(A) an individual designated in section 1114;
(B) a grand or petit juror, witness, or other officer in or of, any court of the United States, or an officer who may be, or was, serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate;
(C) an informant or witness in a Federal criminal investigation or prosecution; or
(D) a State or local officer or employee whose restricted personal information is made publicly available because of the participation in, or assistance provided to, a Federal criminal investigation by that officer or employee;
(3) the term “crime of violence” has the meaning given the term in section 16; and
(4) the term “immediate family” has the meaning given the term in section 115(c)(2).
 
Last edited:
If this is doxxing, then every time a police department puts up a photo of a cop with a cute puppy and includes the cop's name, they're "doxxing" their cop. Idiotic.

If someone is showing their face in public, anyone can take a picture. And if that person's employer already has up photos of that person with their name, it is not somehow "doxxing" for the "anyone" I mentioned to put two and two together.

Doxxing would be one of you hacking my account, identifying me personally, then publishing that information.
 
Mr Person said:
If this is doxxing, then every time a police department puts up a photo of a cop with a cute puppy and includes the cop's name, they're "doxxing" their cop. Idiotic.

If someone is showing their face in public, anyone can take a picture. And if that person's employer already has up photos of that person with their name, it is not somehow "doxxing" for the "anyone" I mentioned to put two and two together.

Doxxing would be one of you hacking my account, identifying me personally, then publishing that information.
Click to expand...

Educating some people is a monumental task. Trump relied on that fact, and he rode it right into the White House.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
What is 'doxing'? (Yes, it is illegal!)

Also keep this in mind: doxing violates the terms of service of most legitimate online news / information / opinion sites.

Doxing is always illegal, whether it is done against a federal employee, a state employee, or a regular person. There are federal and state laws that specifically address doxing government employees. With regular citizens, doxing falls under various state criminal laws, such as stalking, cyberstalking, harassment, threats, and other such laws, depending on the state.




“Doxing“ is a legal term that means revealing “documents” about a person. This can range from revealing the name of a person who uses an alias, but more commonly refers to revealing whatever the person doing it feels will harm, shame, humiliate, endanger, or put the person at some risk. Doxing is a form of stalking or threatening and is illegal under many different federal and state laws, depending on the exact facts and location.

Revealing a “name” per se’ may, or may not be considered “Doxing” depending on the level of anticipated anonymity. However, in this law, the term “restricted personal information” means, “with respect to an individual, the Social Security number, the home address, home phone number, mobile phone number, personal email, or home fax number of, and identifiable to, that individual.” This is an important distinction to remember.

Once you outline the address or location of a person, within which a person can be placed at risk, YOU have VIOLATED THE LAW. PERIOD.

In all cases if you outline the physical location of any individual with the intent to harm, shame, stalk, humiliate, endanger, or otherwise compromise the safety and security of ANY individual you have placed that person in a position of risk and you are in violation of ALL State Stalking laws.

THIS is the most commonly crossed line.

However, in some cases, such as federal agents, or in Mark Osterman’s case his anonymity as a Federal Air Marshal, just revealing his name crosses the threshold for illegal activity.

I CAN FIND THOSE PIECES OF INFORMATION USING GOOGLE SEARCH. IS THAT STILL RESTRICTED? YES. It is illegal to announce or disseminate or post those listed pieces of information for the purposes listed in the law (18 USC § 119). Those are purposes such as threatening or intimidating or making it so others can harass or harm the person. This law is about acts that endanger the safety of or encourage attacks against a person or a person’s family. It is not about where you found the information.


The Illegal Activity of “Doxing”: Revealing “documents or personal information” about a person, without their permission, with the intent to Threaten, Harass, Intimidate, Shame, Humiliate or Place at Risk…. | The Last Refuge
Click to expand...

Yes, doxing is illegal. Good thing these fine people did not dox anyone. :)
 
Grand Mal said:
What's 'doxxing'?
Click to expand...

Publicly posting private information and personal details of your political/social adversaries with the intent of disturbing their peace or with the hope that mischief or harm may befall them. If someone posted all of your personal details so you could be the subject of credit card fraud, or someone could track you down where you live and physically assail you, that is a form of "doxxing."
 
Grand Mal said:
Are they good guys again then?
Click to expand...

They always have been good guys! FBI field agents work everyday to protect our nation.

Washington DC FBI leadership had the problems. But AG Barr is looking into that issue now.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Doxxing
Click to expand...

Is not matching pictures of people in public to publicized pictures. As was said from a different angle:



If this is doxxing, then every time a police department puts up a photo of a cop with a cute puppy and includes the cop's name, they're "doxxing" their cop. Idiotic.

If someone is showing their face in public, anyone can take a picture. And if that person's employer already has up photos of that person with their name, it is not somehow "doxxing" for the "anyone" I mentioned to put two and two together.

Doxxing would be one of you hacking my account, identifying me personally, then publishing that information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom