[sudo-discuss] It's Unconscionable
Michael Scroggins
michaeljscroggins at gmail.com
Fri Mar 1 18:35:12 PST 2013
The National Review as well:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/342003/oakland-mayor-promotes-lock-picking-class-wesley-j-smith
This sort of story is ideal for playing around with, which is how things
go. And it is kind of a dream story for an editor.
I agree with suspending the sale of the tools to cut the
education/commerce link, and with the vast majority of the letter. My
concern is this sentence:
"We recognize now that it was insensitive to have the workshop listed
and broadcast in the way that it was, and we regret doing so."
The sentence implicitly draws a difference of kind between the lock
picking class and the other Workshop Weekend classes. Doing so invites
the question: What is the difference that makes broadcasting this
workshop (in the way it was) regrettable? In an environment where the
mayor, the chief of police and the media have all given the same answer
- the class breeds criminals - allowing that question is regrettable.
The TOOL statement doesn't allow the question to be considered, which is
why I like it. I feel the SudoRoom statement shouldn't either and
should emphasis that all Sudo classes are offered in the spirit of
curiosity, which is a public good.
Michael
Eddan wrote:
> I see it somewhat differently, and think the Workshop Weekend letter
> was thoughtful and appropriate, given the circumstances.
>
> I think the letter was most effective in almost completely narrowing a
> public debate that quickly spun ridiculously out of proportion and
> corrected the gross misrepresentation of the first stories covering
> it. It makes a lot of sense in terms of being sensitive to the
> particular climate in Oakland right now, and I didn't get the
> impression that it was apologetic about actually holding the workshop.
> In fact, they(we)'re going forward with holding it even after the
> Police Chief himself came out publicly saying it was wrong in no
> uncertain terms and the Mayor officially disassociating herself from
> the initiative. To stand stubbornly firm in the context of a fatal
> shooting at the last Art Murmur over rhetorical leeway would likely be
> seen as insensitive and provocative.
>
> All the sincere stuff about building skills and teaching a way of
> thinking would get totally lost in the mainstream media cloud. The
> editors are unsurprisingly having fun with the headlines. /See/ SF
> Weekly - "Mayor Jean Quan Promotes Lock-Picking Classes, Gives Young
> Burglars a Chance to Succeed"
> [http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2013/02/mayor_jean_quan_offers_lock-pi.php]
>
> It was smart to leave the core explanation of why this is important to
> a block-quote by T.O.O.O.L., who teach the class. I also think it was
> a smart move to pull back from selling the kits this time around - no
> use getting the education meme sullied by claims of commercial
> opportunism. It would be cynical not to concede that selling
> lock-picking paraphernalia alongside lock-picking lessons could
> reasonably be seen as inappropriate encouragement. It's not about
> being right - our ultimate goal is to actually engage with the
> community meaningfully, right?
>
>
> All that having been said, I have not hidden my opinion that Sudo Room
> should also publish a statement, as the community hosting the event in
> our common space. I'm interested to find out if that sense is shared
> by others and even more importantly, legitimately opposed.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Michael Scroggins
> <michaeljscroggins at gmail.com <mailto:michaeljscroggins at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> In my opinion, the letter is overly apologetic. Neither Workshop
> Weekend nor SudoRoom has done anything that needs to be apologized
> for. Apologizing for the way the workshop was advertised implies
> there is something wrong with the holding a public lock picking
> workshop, which there is not. I wouldn't cede the rhetorical high
> ground on this point.
>
> I love the TOOL statement. I think it strikes exactly the right
> note. If there is to be a SudoRoom statement (does there need to
> be?) I think it should be in line with the TOOL statement.
>
> Michael
>
> J.D. Zamfirescu wrote:
>> For those interested, Workshop Weekend (that is, my brother and
>> I) prepared the following statement on the lockpicking issue. We
>> fully support Sudo Room having its own statement on the issue too.
>>
>> ===========
>>
>> Over the past two days, Workshop Weekend has received complaints
>> from concerned citizens of Oakland about the upcoming
>> "Introduction to Lockpicking" workshop being offered as part of
>> Workshop Weekend on March 2, 2013. The workshop will run as
>> scheduled, but in response to community concerns, lock-picking
>> tools will no longer be offered for sale at the event.
>>
>>
>> As Oakland residents ourselves, we have felt Oakland's crime
>> problem, and we appreciate the community's concerns that offering
>> a lock-picking workshop appears to encourage crime and sends the
>> wrong message. We recognize now that it was insensitive to have
>> the workshop listed and broadcast in the way that it was, and we
>> regret doing so.
>>
>>
>> To provide some background, Workshop Weekend invited The Open
>> Organization of Lockpickers (TOOOL) to run a workshop about
>> lock-picking and lock mechanisms this weekend.
>>
>>
>> Exploring lock-picking and understanding the limitations of locks
>> is valuable for everyone who relies on locks for physical
>> security, and in kids it can spark an interest in mechanical
>> engineering and complex systems.
>>
>>
>> We would also like to share the following note from TOOOL, the
>> group offering the session: "We in TOOOL are of course sensitive
>> to the concern that occasionally surrounds our lock-themed
>> workshops. We can only hope that the atmosphere of openness,
>> information sharing, and strong ethical standards which is a part
>> of all TOOOL meetings can assuage some concerns. Knowing about
>> the weaknesses in certain locks protects the public; it does not
>> aid criminals. Please visit our website -- toool.us
>> <http://toool.us> -- for more information."
>>
>>
>> We hope this note makes things clear to everyone; our goal is
>> provide an educational and inclusive experience for everyone in
>> Oakland who would like to be involved with our events.
>>
>>
>> /Workshop Weekend is a two-day celebration of hands-on learning
>> taking place in the heart of downtown Oakland, bringing together
>> kids and adults from Oakland as well as the rest of the Bay Area.
>> The event encourages exploration of new interests and passions by
>> offering over 40 workshops in subjects not typically taught in
>> schools, including aeroponics, electronics, and 3D printing. For
>> more information, visit workshopweekend.net
>> <http://workshopweekend.net>/
>>
>>
>> We welcome your thoughts and comments at
>> feedback at workshopweekend.net <mailto:feedback at workshopweekend.net>
>>
>> ===========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:44 PM, J.D. Zamfirescu
>> <zamfire at gmail.com <mailto:zamfire at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Michael, you're not missing anything -- we haven't finished
>> drafting the workshop weekend statement yet. :)
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Michael Scroggins
>> <michaeljscroggins at gmail.com
>> <mailto:michaeljscroggins at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I must have missed something in the email chain as I am
>> unaware of the Workshop Weekend letter. Of course, you
>> are right that the two letters should match, especially
>> in front of the media. I can't help to think, though,
>> that this is an opportunity to drive home the broader
>> point that neither curiosity nor association is a crime.
>>
>>
>>
>> Eddan Katz wrote:
>>> Seems to me like sticking to correcting the misuse of
>>> the word unconscionable can be respectful to the police
>>> chief and informative about the difference between
>>> skills and criminal intent.
>>>
>>> If Sudo Room does a separate statement, it should follow
>>> on Workshop Weekend's letter and support its posture and
>>> position.
>>>
>>> There'll be TV cameras there this weekend - we can feel
>>> pretty confident about that. It would be very useful to
>>> share a common understanding in order not to have our
>>> purpose misrepresented.
>>>
>>>
>>> sent from eddan.com <http://eddan.com>
>>>
>>> On Feb 28, 2013, at 6:07 PM, Michael Scroggins
>>> <michaeljscroggins at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:michaeljscroggins at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think a statement is well and proper. I also think
>>>> arguing the right to disinterest inquiry is the proper
>>>> line.
>>>>
>>>> To the earlier back and forth about "known gang
>>>> members" ... one of the differences between the people
>>>> at SudoRoom and "known gang members" is simply that to
>>>> be classified as "known" is to be stripped of your
>>>> right to disinterested inquiry. All of your actions
>>>> having been prejudged as interested and malicious.
>>>>
>>>> If the letter is worded right we can make a statement
>>>> about the lock picking class and about the direction
>>>> policing in Oakland has taken.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Eddan Katz wrote:
>>>>> J.D. - do you think there should be an additional
>>>>> statement from Sudo Room?
>>>>>
>>>>> Before we proceed any further - does anyone have
>>>>> objections to writing such a letter or signing on to
>>>>> it? What the statement says is another matter for
>>>>> which Sudo member objections should also feel
>>>>> empowered to raise. Comments can be made anonymously
>>>>> on the etherpad or on IRC, if someone isn't
>>>>> comfortable doing it on the list.
>>>>>
>>>>> sent from eddan.com <http://eddan.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 28, 2013, at 5:15 PM, "J.D. Zamfirescu"
>>>>> <zamfire at gmail.com <mailto:zamfire at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, we were hoping to publish it tonight. Let me
>>>>>> try to draft something and send it on?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Part of me is concerned about editing a public
>>>>>> statement on a public list...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Eddan
>>>>>> <eddan at clear.net <mailto:eddan at clear.net>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> J.D. - where were you thinking of publishing this
>>>>>> letter?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it would make for a stronger and more
>>>>>> thoughtful response if there was a collective
>>>>>> voice signing on to it either as a group or
>>>>>> listed as individuals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With the help of the collective editorial prowess
>>>>>> of the Sudo list, do you think you would be ready
>>>>>> to publish it before tomorrow morning?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Eddan
>>>>>> <eddan at clear.net <mailto:eddan at clear.net>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the question is, rather - Can you get
>>>>>> hired by a locksmith company without knowing
>>>>>> how to pick a lock?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 5:01 PM,
>>>>>> <thadwooster at gmail.com
>>>>>> <mailto:thadwooster at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I could be totally wrong on this, but I
>>>>>> believe locksmiths are required to be
>>>>>> bonded, fingerprinted and licensed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 28, 2013, at 4:59 PM, rusty
>>>>>> lindgren wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WTF #@*)DKLJ
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I sent an email to that newb at the
>>>>>>> newspaper... UM, where do they think
>>>>>>> locksmiths learn stuff? Should they
>>>>>>> have to pay to become a locksmith???
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So stupid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Marina
>>>>>>> Kukso <marina.kukso at gmail.com
>>>>>>> <mailto:marina.kukso at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ftfy!: THIS is unconscionable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 4:50 PM,
>>>>>>> Eddan <eddan at clear.net
>>>>>>> <mailto:eddan at clear.net>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now, this requires a response.
>>>>>>> Has anybody started drafting
>>>>>>> something? If not, I will.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> Oakland Police Chief Howard
>>>>>>> Jordan
>>>>>>> <http://www.sfgate.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=bayarea&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Howard+Jordan%22> was
>>>>>>> not pleased.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I'm in shock that people would
>>>>>>> provide a class to teach people
>>>>>>> a skill to violate the law,"
>>>>>>> Jordan said. "It's unconscionable."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lock-pick instructor Michael
>>>>>>> Fitzhugh
>>>>>>> <http://www.sfgate.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=bayarea&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Michael+Fitzhugh%22> is
>>>>>>> a member of TOOOL (The Open
>>>>>>> Organisation Of Lockpickers
>>>>>>> <http://www.sfgate.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=bayarea&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Open+Organisation+Of+Lockpickers%22>),
>>>>>>> a Netherlands-based outfit that
>>>>>>> teaches and holds national and
>>>>>>> international lock-picking
>>>>>>> events annually. In their world,
>>>>>>> lock picking is done for sport
>>>>>>> and bragging rights. But, he
>>>>>>> says, it's also a useful tool if
>>>>>>> you lock yourself out of your home.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jordan has a more conventional
>>>>>>> solution to that problem: "Call
>>>>>>> a locksmith!"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Quan-s-wrong-note-on-lock-picking-class-4318130.php
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Even worse than Quan, this guy's
>>>>>>> so desperate to change the
>>>>>>> subject about the incompetence
>>>>>>> of the OPD in news story after
>>>>>>> news story.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unconscionable!?! This coming
>>>>>>> from a police department that
>>>>>>> was about to go into an
>>>>>>> unprecedented federal
>>>>>>> receivership for its failure to
>>>>>>> reform; not to mention a police
>>>>>>> department seared with a global
>>>>>>> reputation for brutality,
>>>>>>> racism, and excessive means; and
>>>>>>> whose fundamental
>>>>>>> miscalculations and
>>>>>>> mismanagement of the response to
>>>>>>> Occupy cost the city millions of
>>>>>>> dollars.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rusty Lindgren
>>>>>>> **
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>>> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>>> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130301/b5d361b5/attachment.html>
More information about the sudo-discuss
mailing list