3 ms·
I hate the perpetual law enforcement “needs this to protect you”. Seriously, if you have sufficient evidence to believe someone is a threat you should have suff
by olliej 5y ago
I hate the perpetual law enforcement “needs this to protect you”. Seriously, if you have sufficient evidence to believe someone is a threat you should have sufficient information to get a warrant for the information you want.
Any other system is by definition warrant less surveillance, and therefore any data collection is a-ok because anyone “might” be a threat.
That’s why we made warrants required. It’s why needing warrants is literally part of the constitution.
Grumble grumble. Old man shouts at law enforcement.
- nathanaldensr 5y agoDon't self-deprecate your very rational perspective with that last paragraph. You are spot on, and you don't have to be an old man grumbling at cops to think the way you do.
- tempodox 5y agoYou're hitting the nail on the head. It's circular arguments all the way down. How do we know how many criminals there are without making everyone a full-time suspect and surveil them 24/7? in dubio pro reo is out of the window. Now we all have to prove that we're not part of <insert-criminal-activity>.