> we're not going to do that by saying "my privacy is more important than reducing terrorism". You are absolutely right. That is the wrong dichotomy to make.

> we're not going to do that by saying "my privacy is more important than reducing terrorism". You are absolutely right. That is the wrong dichotomy to make. The message should be "you cannot reduce terrorism by taking my privacy; you maybe can reduce terrorism by acting on the terrorists". A lot of this has to do with the fact that people in general are very tired of a situation where criminals and illegal immigrants cannot be deported. For instance, in my country, an asylum seeker was convicted of violence and firearms offences but couldn't be deported nor detained; eventually he went on to a shooting rampage to murder his former girlfriend and kill four of her colleagues shooting around at a mall, using a pistol he obtained illegally from the Balkans. Action by politicians? Make it more difficult to get a legal permit for a firearm.