If you want to knitpick, right back at you because that's 100% not true; the last link is about all known cases of RIPA being used. I feel that if a judge orde

If you want to knitpick, right back at you because that's 100% not true; the last link is about all known cases of RIPA being used. I feel that if a judge orders you to hand over encryption keys you probably should, but I worry about these laws being misused; for example we are sold on them being about paedophiles and terrorists and most of their use cases are simply not about that. That's the basic premise of my argument, I'm not saying (at least here) that there is too much surveillance. Instead I'm saying the powers are given for one reason and then used for another. I don't see how you can disagree with that given what I've provided as evidence. More generally are you asserting that anti-terror powers are never granted and then used for the wrong reasons?