The problem I have is trusting those with the basic concept - how to balance security needs with protecting privacy.

It is a balancing act - and history has shown that not everyone handles it with skill, and grace. Abuse of power comes to mind.

Actually most other countries are LEADING us by example, they won't need to look to us to get any ideas...

We should be the last to ever implement this though. What next? Make usable encryption illegal again? (It used to be, remember?)

If I encrypt something OUTSIDE the space of facebook or skype then use that tool to transmit the data, what then? Instant terrorism suspect I would guess...

This goes along with the thread about internet censorship, its all about our government having control. However, i do not have as big of a problem with this one because even if they do read our messages you are not gonna get in trouble unless you are actually breaking the law. This will make it more difficult for terrorists and criminals alike to communicate descretly.

Internet censorship in some cases could be good but also could be abused very easily. Soon as they take away something like free speech by blocking certain websites. The government's actions become criminal themselves.

Bootz said:

However, i do not have as big of a problem with this one because even if they do read our messages you are not gonna get in trouble unless you are actually breaking the law. This will make it more difficult for terrorists and criminals alike to communicate descretly.

The problem is what is "actually" considered a crime in this area. We've all read and seen where innocent people get caught up in the net of "counter-terrorism"

Sorry but this comes to mind...

They came for the Communists,
and I didn't object - For I wasn't a Communist;
They came for the Socialists,
and I didn't object - For I wasn't a Socialist;
They came for the labor leaders,
and I didn't object - For I wasn't a labor leader;
They came for the Jews,
and I didn't object - For I wasn't a Jew;
Then they came for me -
And there was no one left to object.

- Martin Niemoller, German Protestant Pastor -

The point... if we accept bad behavior because it doesn't happen to us, then there will be no one left to object to your wrongful accusers.

I'm all about security and protection and remember the horrors of 911 as well as the many horrors of terrorism around the world, so yeah, we need measures to catch these people before things happen.

If this is to be done, I would hope it’s STRONGLY administered by the courts, and not just become a tool for a few overzealous governmental agencies to spy on its citizens for "security" reasons… wink wink.

It’s a fine balancing act, and well…

I think something like this wouldn't be too bad provided that (1) you have nothing to hide or (2) the government doesn't go mad with power. I'm not too worried about the government going mad though because of the separation of powers in the American government and the practice of judicial review by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court justices declare this unconstitutional, then the government will be forced to either scrap the idea or ease restrictions on it so that freedom of speech is still protected.