"Along with some lesser Counts," the Revd is replying, "'twas one of the least tolerable of Offenses in that era, the worst of Dick Turpin seeming but the Carelessness of Youth beside it,-- the Crime they styl'd 'Anonymity.' That is, I left messages posted publicly, but did not sign them. I knew some night-running lads in the district who let me use their Printing-Press,-- somehow, what I got into printing up, were Accounts of certain Crimes I had observ'd, committed by the Stronger against the Weaker,-- enclosures, evictions, Assize verdicts, Activities of the Military,-- giving the Names of as many of the Perpetrators as I was sure of, yet keeping back what I foolishly imagin'd my own, till the Night I was tipp'd and brought in to London, in Chains, and clapp'd in the Tower."
"The Tower!"
"Oh, do not tease them so," Tenebræ prays him.
"Ludgate, then? whichever, 'twas Gaol. It took me till I was lying among the Rats and Vermin, upon the freezing edge of a Future invisible, to understand that my name had never been my own,-- rather belonging, all this time, to the Authorities, who forbade me to change it, or withhold it, as 'twere a Ring upon the Collar of a Beast, ever waiting for the Lead to be fasten'd on..."
--Thomas Pynchon, Mason & Dixon
Recently, Matt Blaze's paper on vulnerabilities in master keyed physical locks caused some moderate controversy in the physical lock security community. However, the sad fact is that---as with computer system security---physical world security is essentially a joke. This is both bad (your home really isn't secure) and good (when you accidentally lock your key in your apartment, there are easy ways to get back in)---see Ben Day's letter in the March 15 Crypto-Gram (about 3/4 the way down the document).
Google searches for interesting documents on this topic (these are community-disseminated documents with many transient mirrors on the web; linking directly to any one location would be less reliable than the Google search):
Laws on possession of lock picking equipment vary from state to state. In most states, it seems legal to own and use such tools, but using them in the commission of a crime is an additional offense (on top of the original crime). Some other states' laws are easy to find on the web, but I've only found one other pointer to the Washington State code; so, I'm linking this up here for Google's sake:
From Revised Code of Washington, Title 9A (Crimes and punishments), Chapter 52 (Burglary and trespass), Section 060 (Making or having burglar tools):
(1) Every person who shall make or mend or cause to be made or mended, or have in his possession, any engine, machine, tool, false key, pick lock, bit, nippers, or implement adapted, designed, or commonly used for the commission of burglary under circumstances evincing an intent to use or employ, or allow the same to be used or employed in the commission of a burglary, or knowing that the same is intended to be so used, shall be guilty of making or having burglar tools.
(2) Making or having burglar tools is a gross misdemeanor.
In other words, it seems it's perfectly legal to possess these tools, so long as you do not "evince intent" to use them for burglary.
COWARDLY DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer. If you really care to know the law, consult someone trained in the law.
While I'm at it, here's one place you can buy some tools.