Dave’s Joke Du Jour: Government officials say there has been a record amount of heroin smuggled into the country this year. The good news is it should be a great year for jazz.


I try not to be a "vis a vis" type of guy, but the way I see it, the issue of mirrors and security cameras isn’t one of effectiveness, but rather privacy.

Just because you have notheing (nay make that very little) to hide, doesn’t mean you like being watched. I don’t like my own eyes staring back at me in a mirror let alone the feeling another pair of beady one’s are beating down on me from some hidden place.

There are a number of people who enter our stores without the intent of shoplifting on their mind. These are the honest few hso believe in Capitalism and will spend their hard earned cash on the entertainment we offer to them. To give these people the perception we are watching them creates an atmosphere of implied mistrust that has to be counter productive to any business.

On the other hand, shoplifting is a major problem and we have to offer some deterrent to those who will seize any window of opportunity to swipe that Steppenwolf cassette.

How do we find a balance between these two diverse forces? I think if we have to fall on one side or the other, it’s better to err on the side of blissful, blind trust. As a consumer I want to shop in a place where I don’t have to worry that my next move will show up on the following evening’s edition of "A Current Affair".

I recently got a call at my state job from an "angry taxpayer" (my favorite type of call). This person had gotten on a mailing list from somebody who got his address from the documents he filed with the Secretary of State.

Never mind one of the major purposes of the Secretary of State’s office is as the official recorder of legal documents, and that almost all the information filed is available to the public. This gentleman kept claiming we had caused a violation of his privacy.

His leap in logic seemed to be a bit far fetched for me. How can disseminating public information be an invasion of privacy? His complaint was based on being fed up with getting so much junk mail. He said it was a waste of his time to have to sort through solicitations. I resisted the urge to tell him about the only place where junk mail isn’t a nuisance is somewhere in Tahiti.

I think he may have seen a recent story on McNeil/Lehrer about how much information which most of us assume is "confidential" can be bought. According to one man who used his computer to access information on people, everything from one’s credit history to one’s medical records is available if you look in the right places. To demonstrate his point, this fellow pulled up how much Dan Quayle spent at Sears one month.

Paranoia might be the clinical diagnosis, but it is a bit frightening that every move you make can be scrutinized by someone, somewhere at some time. And the people watching probably are not the type who will see the humor in practicing one’s stand up comedy act in front of a Super America security camera.