3 ms·

> "That unconstitutional overreach has been used to do what exactly? No I really want to know. It’s not keeping us safe..." Unpopular opinion, but you know the

> "That unconstitutional overreach has been used to do what exactly? No I really want to know. It’s not keeping us safe..." Unpopular opinion, but you know the old saying: No one hears about the times the FBI, CIA, etc has stopped a terrorist act, you only hear about the disasters that eventually played out. For every one sick person that went on to do something crazy, hundreds have been caught before anything happened. I don't understand the upset for "warrantless wire-tapping" unless you have something to hide, especially when these days people are begging the government to protect us from extremists/terrorists and not sit on their hands.

throwaway0a5e 4y ago
>For every one sick person that went on to do something crazy, hundreds have been caught before anything happened. If their dragnets had even a shred of utility for that purpose they'd be telling you about it at every opportunity.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- pwython 4y ago
  They do put it out there. But what makes headlines that people actually see? "500 murdered in a terrorist attack" versus: "We caught some bad guys" [who potentially could've killed more]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nobody9999 4y ago
>I don't understand the upset for "warrantless wire-tapping" unless you have something to hide, especially when these days people are begging the government to protect us from extremists/terrorists and not sit on their hands. Okay. Let's assume for the moment that you "have nothing to hide." Let's go to your house and set up cameras and microphones covering the premises. Then, let's do the same for your automobile(s). And for good measure, let's have you wear a microphone 24/7 too. Once that's done, we can set up a website where we can all watch/listen to you. If you have nothing to hide, that should be no big deal, right? What's that? You don't consent to such monitoring? Why? Do you have something to hide?
- pwython 4y ago
  > "Once that's done, we can set up a website where we can all watch/listen to you... What's that? You don't consent to such monitoring?" Having a system for counter-terrorism agencies to check phone logs for keywords is vastly different from setting up cameras in everyones houses for the world to see. I'm not even sure how anyone would think that's remotely similar.
LordDragonfang 4y ago
> No one hears about the times the FBI, CIA, etc has stopped a terrorist act We should be hearing about them, if they actually exist, especially with how rabid the media is in reporting any potential terrorism stories[1]. A policy of not just quietly "disappearing" people is supposedly what sets us apart from those authoritarian countries that the US likes to paint as boogeymen. If what you're saying was true, it'd be a horrifying breach of ethics and the literal constitutional right to due process. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/does-the-news-reflect-what-we-die-from https://ourworldindata.org/does-the-news-reflect-what-we-die...
samatman 4y ago
For this to be true, the FBI would have to: capture 'sick persons' without charging them with a crime or sending out a press release. I'm curious. What are the other differences in the parallel universe you come from? Does boot leather taste like strawberry shortcake?
Taek 4y ago
Unpopular opinon because its not backed by data. We can use terrist events in countries that don't live under a panopticon as a control group. Mass surveillance is not improving general safety.
- pwython 4y ago
  Data: https://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/subs/add_myths.htm https://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/subs/add_myths.htm
int_19h 4y ago
They're welcome to tell us all about all those terrorist acts that they have supposedly prevented. And if you don't understand the upset for having some stranger rife through your private data, may I have a full dump of your email inbox?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
artificialLimbs 4y ago
“hundreds have been caught“ [citation needed] You are going to get flagged to death. Rightfully so.
- pwython 4y ago
  Here's one of many examples, just from a small county in Florida, relating to the "Sex Money Murder" gang: https://www.fox13news.com/news/41-arrested-in-racketeering-investigation-involving-suspects-from-florida-north-carolina https://www.fox13news.com/news/41-arrested-in-racketeering-i... "We did a gang wiretap... where we listened to social media apps... where we listened to cell phones and their communications... In total, 41 suspects are facing charges..." That's what I'm talking about. Suspects being monitored. Even if there's not a court warrant for such individuals, I'd be happy with the LEO using any means to catch criminals involved in sex trafficking, murder, etc.
MarkMarine 4y ago

throwaway0a5e 4y ago

>For every one sick person that went on to do something crazy, hundreds have been caught before anything happened. If their dragnets had even a shred of utility for that purpose they'd be telling you about it at every opportunity.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pwython 4y ago
They do put it out there. But what makes headlines that people actually see? "500 murdered in a terrorist attack" versus: "We caught some bad guys" [who potentially could've killed more]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

nobody9999 4y ago

>I don't understand the upset for "warrantless wire-tapping" unless you have something to hide, especially when these days people are begging the government to protect us from extremists/terrorists and not sit on their hands. Okay. Let's assume for the moment that you "have nothing to hide." Let's go to your house and set up cameras and microphones covering the premises. Then, let's do the same for your automobile(s). And for good measure, let's have you wear a microphone 24/7 too. Once that's done, we can set up a website where we can all watch/listen to you. If you have nothing to hide, that should be no big deal, right? What's that? You don't consent to such monitoring? Why? Do you have something to hide?

pwython 4y ago
> "Once that's done, we can set up a website where we can all watch/listen to you... What's that? You don't consent to such monitoring?" Having a system for counter-terrorism agencies to check phone logs for keywords is vastly different from setting up cameras in everyones houses for the world to see. I'm not even sure how anyone would think that's remotely similar.

LordDragonfang 4y ago

> No one hears about the times the FBI, CIA, etc has stopped a terrorist act We should be hearing about them, if they actually exist, especially with how rabid the media is in reporting any potential terrorism stories[1]. A policy of not just quietly "disappearing" people is supposedly what sets us apart from those authoritarian countries that the US likes to paint as boogeymen. If what you're saying was true, it'd be a horrifying breach of ethics and the literal constitutional right to due process. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/does-the-news-reflect-what-we-die-from https://ourworldindata.org/does-the-news-reflect-what-we-die...

samatman 4y ago

For this to be true, the FBI would have to: capture 'sick persons' without charging them with a crime or sending out a press release. I'm curious. What are the other differences in the parallel universe you come from? Does boot leather taste like strawberry shortcake?

Taek 4y ago

Unpopular opinon because its not backed by data. We can use terrist events in countries that don't live under a panopticon as a control group. Mass surveillance is not improving general safety.

pwython 4y ago
Data: https://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/subs/add_myths.htm https://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/subs/add_myths.htm

int_19h 4y ago

They're welcome to tell us all about all those terrorist acts that they have supposedly prevented. And if you don't understand the upset for having some stranger rife through your private data, may I have a full dump of your email inbox?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

artificialLimbs 4y ago

“hundreds have been caught“ [citation needed] You are going to get flagged to death. Rightfully so.

pwython 4y ago
Here's one of many examples, just from a small county in Florida, relating to the "Sex Money Murder" gang: https://www.fox13news.com/news/41-arrested-in-racketeering-investigation-involving-suspects-from-florida-north-carolina https://www.fox13news.com/news/41-arrested-in-racketeering-i... "We did a gang wiretap... where we listened to social media apps... where we listened to cell phones and their communications... In total, 41 suspects are facing charges..." That's what I'm talking about. Suspects being monitored. Even if there's not a court warrant for such individuals, I'd be happy with the LEO using any means to catch criminals involved in sex trafficking, murder, etc.

MarkMarine 4y ago