Originally Posted by RedHorseRidge
I guess I just don't feel the government has the right to spy on innocent people, or perform illegal search and seizure, etc., etc. just in the name of security... So I think surveillance DOES matter... people should have an expectation of privacy... according to our constitution anyway.
While I believe in protecting our country, I don't believe that should come at the cost of our individual rights and privacy. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Well, I just think it is b/c you are up to no good. (KIDDING).
I agree w you in part
(especially if there is no reason to "spy" on a given individual on an indivdual basis). However, it would be difficult to survey an area for unusual human
activity, or what not, w/o a surveillance systems surveying humans. But, this capability can be abused, or misused as you seem to think it is - yet you don't seem to think surgical strike "authorization" for "whenever we say it is necessary" could
be or is an abuse? You don't die from surveillance.
W/o the use and data obtained from current surveillance systems, it would be a lot more difficult to determine who is innocent citizen and who is not in a lot of hypthetical situations. And, aircraft of anysort would have less chance of hitting a highly specific target at the "best time" (e.g., when the person sought is most likely at
a given target). So, I don't think it is as easy as all that to say one could potentially threaten your liberty, while the other cannot.