4 ms·
There is an argument that is sometimes made in this debate, and it concerns the gradual nature of the change to our privacy rights (or just privacy). It is an o
by anongraddebt 7y ago
There is an argument that is sometimes made in this debate, and it concerns the gradual nature of the change to our privacy rights (or just privacy). It is an old argument. It took a number of years for me to convince myself that it was right. But it is a correct argument.
In a round about way, the argument ends up concluding that we are, in fact, on some version of a slippery slope. We can see that slope quite clearly in what you write:
"So many petty crimes (e.g. home burglaries, car breakins, etc) go unsolved because the police just don't have the tools and resources to go after all those crimes."
Even just ten years ago, a number of the ideas being batted around now about privacy would have seemed alien. I understand that attitudes can change, but do we have the right attitudes now? Are they good attitudes? The attitude that sees nothing wrong with seriously contemplating whether it's a net good to have the police sitting in a tiny camera outside your front door? Go back a couple decades and we would have been appalled at the notion.
Sometimes I surprise myself with how much ground I've given up already (even if just on a personal level).
- lopmotr 7y agoI think it's a particularly American idea to want to cripple the police. They don't trust their government or their police, and perhaps rightly so, I don't know. Where I'm from, I would be happy if the police could use cameras everywhere to catch all the horrible petty crimes. People get their lifetime collections of things trashed and stolen during burglaries. It's quite upsetting for the victims. The police usually can't do anything because there's no-body to talk to. If their computer could tell them who somebody is by their face, then we'd all be safer and happier. There are also actual murders that go unsolved because there's again no-one to talk to. If the police themselves are corrupt and abuse their power, that's a problem, but it's a separate problem that not every country faces. If I was an American, I'd want to have proper accountability for the police first. They should be held to a higher standard than ordinary people, not a lower standard, like it seems they are.
- Mirioron 7y agoI don't think it's uniquely American at all. It's weird to me that some places don't feel this way. Remember that every state-caused atrocity is aided by the police in some way. Even if you're okay with the police right now, you might not be in 30 years. Also, I think the chance of the police (as a group) not being corrupt is about the same as politicians (as a group) not being corrupt - essentially zero. The incentives just aren't there for there to be no corruption in law enforcement. And even if there's no corruption in law enforcement and your government is great, you still have to remember that police officers generally aren't the cream of the crop of society. They make mistakes and there usually isn't much recourse.
- perl4ever 7y agoI think anyone here is almost certainly going to be more pro-police in 30 years, assuming they are at least 10 years old. It's just the natural course of things, although of course who knows what society will be like by then. But going by all of past history...