Because the decision to approve the use of new technology is largely budgetary in nature, so generally an easier decision than the complex discussion that has to go into a well thought out approach to balancing privacy concerns with law enforcement efficacy. When "the good guys" say that they'll use a shiny new piece of equipment to do a better job of defeating "the bad guys", it's easy to say yes and hard to say no.
Judah On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 6:46 AM, Vivec <gel21...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is what I do not understand. > > Why are they approving the use of new technology, without also changing the > laws governing rights to privacy and civil rights to include these new > technologies? > Why rush ahead to update one and leave the other languishing or untouched? > > On 30 May 2012 11:46, Judah McAuley <ju...@wiredotter.com> wrote: > >> >> And it's all invisible to the naked eye. And currently done without a >> warrant. And there aren't any rules on how long agencies get to keep >> all the raw data. Or who it gets shared with. Or how to exclude >> information about people who aren't an investigation target. >> >> > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:351661 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
