Privacy issues more important than solving child abductions?

@dawnald (85137)
Shingle Springs, California
November 16, 2010 2:46pm CST
I read this in the paper a few days ago: http://www.telegram.com/article/20101113/NEWS/101119849/1052/RSS01&source=rss Basically, the Internal Revenue Service has information that can sometimes help solve child abductions, specifically where the child was abducted by one of the parents. They have taken the stand that taxpayer privacy is more important than solving an abduction case, even where there is an outstanding warrant for the parent who has the child. Right or wrong? Have we gone a little overboard with privacy regulations?
2 people like this
11 responses
@Maggiepie (7816)
• United States
17 Nov 10
I didn't know this. It's stupid. "Privacy?" When checkers at airports can touch your genitalia?!? Please. Just more endless evidence that the politically correct inmates are running the asylum our country has become. Maggiepie "The difference between the almost-right word & the right word is really a large matter; it's the difference between the lightning-bug & the lightning." ~ Mark Twain
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
17 Nov 10
Like I said to somebody above, I bet the IRS would make a freakin' exception if it were a murder case, or a political one. The law needs to be amended.
1 person likes this
@Maggiepie (7816)
• United States
17 Nov 10
I'll happily second that notion! Maggiepie "The difference between the almost-right word & the right word is really a large matter; it's the difference between the lightning-bug & the lightning." ~ Mark Twain
1 person likes this
@vandana7 (102698)
• India
17 Nov 10
Hi Maggiepie. :) You can be really..
2 people like this
@katsmeow1213 (28716)
• United States
16 Nov 10
Wrong Wrong Wrong!! Reminds me of a story I keep seeing on the news here. They're talking about installing cameras in key locations around a bad side of town in our big city here. There is a lot of crime down there, especially homicides and other violent crimes. The cameras that are to be installed are to help catch the criminals and hopefully deter crime from happening in these areas. However the neighborhood is all up in arms about the fact that these cameras (which are being placed at street corners) are a violation to their privacy. Um.. okay, if they're putting the camera in your house, yeah, that's a violation of privacy.. but we're talking about the street here, where crime actually happens frequently! Why would anyone be opposed to that? If it made the streets even 1% safer I'd be all for it!
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
16 Nov 10
The rich guys up in city hall don't want their pictures taken with the local hookers? Seriously, I don't know why anybody would have a problem with that either, unless they were up to something.
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
16 Nov 10
Maybe they should have them on the north side too.
• United States
16 Nov 10
Oh No No!! Our government officials go to New Jersey to get their hookers! At least, that's what our ex govenor, Elliot Spitzer, did.. using tax payer money no less. So thanks to that being discovered we were stuck with David Patterson for awhile, ugh! I would have preferred to pay for Spitzer's hookers, lol! Besides that, I think most of the local hookers hang out on the north side (that's where all the sleezy strip clubs are).. where as these cameras are going up on the west and south sides.
1 person likes this
@paula27661 (15811)
• Australia
17 Nov 10
I am not sure how it works in Australia but I think that in the case of child abduction the Taxation Office would release the details required to the police. I am surprised that cases like the one in the story are not handled by the federal police. It is a ridiculous situation and common sense has definitely not prevailed in this case
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
17 Nov 10
Nope it hasn't and they ought to go back and amend the law.
1 person likes this
@vandana7 (102698)
• India
17 Nov 10
Honest? I think there are many areas where you Americans have gone overboard. :) Privacy is just one of them. :)
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
17 Nov 10
Yep, this one went too far in the wrong direction, I think.
@bounce58 (17380)
• Canada
20 Nov 10
Surely at this age of technology, private information could be sorted out. And the difference between what should be kept and not should be a little bit easier. Maybe a cross referencing of missing children's list with children claimed as exemption. Maybe we find a lot more missing children if we did this. Anyway, priorities need to be sorted.
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
26 Nov 10
Yep, they do. sounds like the law needs to be changed...
@lynnymac (105)
• United States
18 Nov 10
this is crazy. how can the government put the taxpayers rights above that of the children ? shouldn't the safty of the children of our nation always be put first, in every situation ? there must be way to change this rediculas 'law'.
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
26 Nov 10
You would think so. Write your congressman, maybe?
@GardenGerty (169489)
• United States
17 Nov 10
Dawnald, I think you have said it all, and yet our privacy is only important when it is the government being asked for information. If they wanted information, our privacy would be of no concern to them.
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
17 Nov 10
You are so right!
@Maggiepie (7816)
• United States
13 May 11
Wow, Dawn! Thanks so much for the Best Response mark! I see my star has gone up a notch, thanks to you & others who like me, I'm guessing! Maggiepie "England & America are two countries divided by a common language." ~ G.B. Shaw
@cynthiann (18612)
• Jamaica
17 Nov 10
Simple: Surely if the IRS has information that can solve child abduction then should no this be given? Something not quite right here or else I am just not getting it. Common sense is a very uncommon thing to have
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
17 Nov 10
The law exempts child support cases but not child abduction. Strange indeed...
@hofferp (4734)
• United States
16 Nov 10
I'm having a tough time with this one. I don't want the IRS releasing anything about me to anyone. What little privacy I have, I'd like to keep. But then, if my kid was taken, and the IRS knew his/her whereabouts???? Why not make child abduction federal crimes (then the IRS from what I think I read could be forthcoming). Don't most abductors flee to another state (or to another country), making it a federal crime, instead of a state/local issue? Anyway, I would need to get a whole lot more information before I'd change the law.
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
16 Nov 10
yeah it would be a federal crime if they crossed state lines, but I guess the privacy statutes have to specifically exempt child abduction and they don't
16 Nov 10
this is ridiculous. If help can be provided and it certainly is needed then it should be used. This has to be one of the most important things, when will they get their priorities sorted.
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85137)
• Shingle Springs, California
16 Nov 10
Probably when somebody changes the law and makes it say that they have to.