[labster]

I don't understand why the FBI isn't prepared to just act illegally in terrorism cases. If they're so damn sure that there's going to be an attack, just do the warrantless search and prevent the attack. And just be fine with the fact that they won't get to prosecute the bad guys -- the attack was thwarted, and that's good enough for me. And if they don't find anything? Well, Lucy's got some 'splainin to do!

[nitrogen]

We don't want them acting illegally just because they feel it's necessary, but if someone really, truly believes they are stopping an attack by doing so, maybe let them do it that way and face the consequences. That's what the real heroes in movies do; they save the day, and then accept the punishment for their misdeeds in the process. A real hero would be willing to spend some time in jail if it was the only way to save thousands of lives (a point I do not concede, but for the sake of argument...).

[ridgeguy]

Exactly right. Maybe there's a rare edge case that calls for illegal activity. If so, and if law enforcement does it, they need to explain their actions so we can determine whether they were right and should be excused or wrong, and should be sanctioned. No transparency, no accountability, no progress.