4 ms·

You're essentially arguing that legal precedents against any government behavior at all are ineffective and pointless. Or do you believe 4th amendment issues a

• BugsJustFindMe 5y ago
  None of these cases establish rules delineating what behavior is allowed vs not allowed populationwide, nor do they ever establish any punishment for constitutional violation. They only say that a very specific collection of behaviors can no longer be performed all at once by the same group on a very specific group of people for a very specific period of time. And none of them prevent policing agencies from just doing it again and again and waiting out the legal challenges each time. Ok, so 45 days is too much in this particular case. The next program will spin up recordings for 35 days and run for another 6 years and try again. Or they'll use wifi beacons on street lights instead of aerial cameras and the details will be different requiring a new set of legal processes. Cops don't care if it gets challenged in court because they're not paying the court fees. The public is. They get their inflated budgets regardless with zero consequences. Chipping away tiny fragments of a growing lava flow long after they cool is not my definition of progress. We've had ~250 years of time for so-called "progress" since the establishment of the fourth amendment, and several decades since global adoption of a public internet. Do you feel like the government has more information about you today, or less? Why?