A discussion I've never really seen take place is, "Why does law enforcement have a (prominent) seat at the table for which laws should be passed?" We in the U

A discussion I've never really seen take place is, "Why does law enforcement have a (prominent) seat at the table for which laws should be passed?" We in the US continually hear from the FBI and other agencies how they need to abridge rights in order to be more effective. IMO, that really shouldn't be in their wheelhouse. They should be enforcing only laws that exist. Making new laws for their convenience should be none of their business. If they are hamstrung by some pesky civil rights, tough. I'm sure there may exist counterexamples, but I can't think of where an agency has advocated in favor of more personal protections.