> And regarding using the technology to search for criminals - it's a classic slippery slope issue. Many of us are happy that a serial killer or other murderer/rapist was found using the technology, but already police have used it to find a burglar. I'm assuming that they'll use it for non-violent drug crimes next.
My big concern is that when the new thing that whittles down the 4th amendment is talked about, it is almost always with a slam dunk case that is also an incredibly serious case. But the average investigation rarely ends in a slam dunk. Allowing police to bypass protections of privacy and checks and balances to their scope of investigation also destroys lives. Semen found inside a person is pretty obvious, but what about just DNA found at a crime scene. If someone is stabbed in a back alley and police just sweep up DNA and run a massive database and tie it to a homeless person without an alibi. It might not matter that the homeless person slept there a week before, in the absence of a better lead, they might push for a conviction. Or just sweeping up all phones in the area during the crime. Maybe someone was in the neighborhood but was completely unrelated. In the absence of a better lead, an innocent person could be targeted.
An innocent person railroaded by the police is as much a victim as the original victim of the crime. There is a reason police need “probable cause”. To prevent wide net fishing that can be used just to turn up something to tie someone to a crime, guilty or not.
My big concern is that when the new thing that whittles down the 4th amendment is talked about, it is almost always with a slam dunk case that is also an incredibly serious case. But the average investigation rarely ends in a slam dunk. Allowing police to bypass protections of privacy and checks and balances to their scope of investigation also destroys lives. Semen found inside a person is pretty obvious, but what about just DNA found at a crime scene. If someone is stabbed in a back alley and police just sweep up DNA and run a massive database and tie it to a homeless person without an alibi. It might not matter that the homeless person slept there a week before, in the absence of a better lead, they might push for a conviction. Or just sweeping up all phones in the area during the crime. Maybe someone was in the neighborhood but was completely unrelated. In the absence of a better lead, an innocent person could be targeted.
An innocent person railroaded by the police is as much a victim as the original victim of the crime. There is a reason police need “probable cause”. To prevent wide net fishing that can be used just to turn up something to tie someone to a crime, guilty or not.