3 ms·

> Even if it caught 100%, it would not be worth violating the privacy rights of all of the people who are not criminals. Sounds nice, but have you really thoug

• sneak 7y ago
  It is not possible to imprison 100% of criminals without imprisoning some innocent people by accident (or perhaps intent, as is the case in the USA today). What you are describing is a totalitarian society without the presumption of innocence. I don't think the "well it wouldn't happen to me" delusion is strong enough for people to actively want that, no.
• einpoklum 7y ago
  > I think you might be surprised what people would be willing to give up to live in a crime-free society. 1. Very often, they're quite willing to give up _other people's_ privacy. 2. Have you considered what many people are willing to give up to live in a mass-surveillance-free society? Probably not, because we're never given these options for serious considerations and for us to choose. It's a false dilemma - the state makes the decision, eats away our privacy and uses things like pedophilia as the excuse because it's scary. 3. Let's start with making some sacrifices to prevent criminal behavior by elected officials (Trump family, Biden family, Bush family, Clinton family - I'm looking at you people), and in high finance (2008 crisis racketeers who never faced any criminal action) and once that's sorted out, then let's talk about what more needs to be done to achieve a "crime-free society".