Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I do not believe the US Government is a giant conspiracy to evade the constitution for the purpose of apprehending drug users. I believe that when the government seeks a warrant to surveil foreign targets for counterterrorism, their interests are actually in disrupting terrorism.

That doesn't mean I think we have effective counterterrorism (for instance, there's widespread evidence that CIA uses, or at least for a long time used, torture to attempt to obtain information in counterterrorism cases; torture is morally repellent and, equally importantly, demonstrably counterproductive), or that I think terrorism is legitimately the key federal goal that DHS and CIA claim that it is.

But I don't subscribe to the slippery slope argument that suggests that the government will inevitably use every power we give it for any purpose to, I don't know, enforce the Comics Code Authority.



The US government has a long history of using laws for much broader purposes than originally intended. The PATRIOT Act has many great examples:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_invocations_of_th...

I don't see why warrantless wiretaps would be held to a higher standard than similar prior laws.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: