<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Privacy laws and James Kim	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/01/privacy-laws-and-james-kim/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/01/privacy-laws-and-james-kim/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 11:27:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: John Burgess		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/01/privacy-laws-and-james-kim/comment-page-1/#comment-5327</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John Burgess]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 11:27:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4392#comment-5327</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[One of the more awkward things US Embassy employees have to deal with is contacts from people in the US seeking &#039;whereabouts and welfare&#039; of Americans abroad.

Privacy laws prohibit providing any information beyond &#039;Alive&#039; or &#039;Can&#039;t find him/her&#039;. The presumption is that the traveler (absent any documented and particular mental health condition) has the right to determine who knows where and how s/he is. Anything further is intrusive.

The same goes for Americans under arrest or in hospitals overseas. They have to sign a privacy waiver form that identifies who can be notified: family, Congress, media, anyone, named individuals, or no one.

Perhaps a exception should be made for clear emergencies, but who gets to define &#039;clear&#039;?
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the more awkward things US Embassy employees have to deal with is contacts from people in the US seeking &#8216;whereabouts and welfare&#8217; of Americans abroad.</p>
<p>Privacy laws prohibit providing any information beyond &#8216;Alive&#8217; or &#8216;Can&#8217;t find him/her&#8217;. The presumption is that the traveler (absent any documented and particular mental health condition) has the right to determine who knows where and how s/he is. Anything further is intrusive.</p>
<p>The same goes for Americans under arrest or in hospitals overseas. They have to sign a privacy waiver form that identifies who can be notified: family, Congress, media, anyone, named individuals, or no one.</p>
<p>Perhaps a exception should be made for clear emergencies, but who gets to define &#8216;clear&#8217;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: BladeDoc		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/01/privacy-laws-and-james-kim/comment-page-1/#comment-5326</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[BladeDoc]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 08:35:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4392#comment-5326</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Yeah, because if we substantially weakened privacy laws the new access would be used for search and rescue as opposed to spam, focus marketing, stalking, tracking your wife/husband for fear of affair, tracking celebrities, etc, etc. Because SAR that would be helped by Mr Kim&#039;s proposal happens frequently. NOT!
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, because if we substantially weakened privacy laws the new access would be used for search and rescue as opposed to spam, focus marketing, stalking, tracking your wife/husband for fear of affair, tracking celebrities, etc, etc. Because SAR that would be helped by Mr Kim&#8217;s proposal happens frequently. NOT!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: TC		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/01/privacy-laws-and-james-kim/comment-page-1/#comment-5325</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TC]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 04:22:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4392#comment-5325</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Fine a course should be provided for the newbies amongst us about the Donner party and the Sierra Neveda range PRIOR to getting a drivers license!

Does that help?

100% of the cops for sure had access to such, had Kim desired his family to have such, he would have provided them with logins for such, all by himself!

Have we not seen enough of our rights wiped off the face of the earth this year already?  I think we have!

Young Kim was not totally stupid, but he did indeed do some very dumb things, his first was taking that road, his second was leaving it.  That is what led to his death as he seemed to wander to a location very close BACK at the car and no closer to rescue or any sort of main road.

I can almost not believe there is not a dumb enough attorney in CA to take this one on.  Oh but time has been short, one will surface I&#039;m sure of that!

Short lesson, the road that led to an impossible position is the same road that will lead you out.  I&#039;ll add that anybody searching can see that road as well.

Oh wait, the legal approach, &quot;next of kin&quot; such does not actually exist until someone is proven dead right?  At which point they come of the actual status of &quot;next of kin&quot;.

I could be wrong.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fine a course should be provided for the newbies amongst us about the Donner party and the Sierra Neveda range PRIOR to getting a drivers license!</p>
<p>Does that help?</p>
<p>100% of the cops for sure had access to such, had Kim desired his family to have such, he would have provided them with logins for such, all by himself!</p>
<p>Have we not seen enough of our rights wiped off the face of the earth this year already?  I think we have!</p>
<p>Young Kim was not totally stupid, but he did indeed do some very dumb things, his first was taking that road, his second was leaving it.  That is what led to his death as he seemed to wander to a location very close BACK at the car and no closer to rescue or any sort of main road.</p>
<p>I can almost not believe there is not a dumb enough attorney in CA to take this one on.  Oh but time has been short, one will surface I&#8217;m sure of that!</p>
<p>Short lesson, the road that led to an impossible position is the same road that will lead you out.  I&#8217;ll add that anybody searching can see that road as well.</p>
<p>Oh wait, the legal approach, &#8220;next of kin&#8221; such does not actually exist until someone is proven dead right?  At which point they come of the actual status of &#8220;next of kin&#8221;.</p>
<p>I could be wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: ben		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/01/privacy-laws-and-james-kim/comment-page-1/#comment-5324</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ben]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2007 16:34:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4392#comment-5324</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The area where Mr. Kim died was Federal land, not a park of any description.

The way it&#039;s posed infers that any of Oregon&#039;s state parks might be unsafe to the unwary, which is usually not the case unless the unwary happen to be screwing around on the beach at high tide.

I&#039;ll cease promoting tourism now.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The area where Mr. Kim died was Federal land, not a park of any description.</p>
<p>The way it&#8217;s posed infers that any of Oregon&#8217;s state parks might be unsafe to the unwary, which is usually not the case unless the unwary happen to be screwing around on the beach at high tide.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll cease promoting tourism now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
