I'm browsing the RFC, and it sounds like they're planning on having people's firewalls spit out IIALP messages in response to port scans, etc. In my opinion, this is a really bad idea!

You don't know the half of it. Slashdot actually port scans every computer that posts anonymously looking for proxies. If this protocol went into affect, Slashdot would be at the top of the list, continually proxy scanning the hundreds of anonymous posters it gets per minute. If ISPs implemented it, no one would even be able to route to Slashdot.

Consider the effectiveness of Slashdot's own "excessive bad posting" filter, which (to overcome DHCP) has subnet-banned class C's all over the Internet, blocking hundreds of people from posting.

I'd say that just based on the examples give above, this kind of banlisting would be a false-positive-ridden nightmare scenario.

A dangerous person is a lot more dangerous with a gun than without. It takes mental and physical capability to do any level of damage to the safety of others. If the person is mentally capable of mass murder, making him physically capable is the ultimate insanity.

A dangerous person will find a way to arm himself regardless of the law. Removing my right to own arms is nothing more than removing my legal right to defend myself and my family. If a person is mentally capable of mass murder, he will find a way to make himself physically capable. If he is physically capable, making the rest of us physically incapable of defending ourselves is the ultimate insanity.