[fiter]

I agree with you. If we could have this technology in the same context as warrants, I'd be happy.

[brandmeyer]

Unfortunately, warrants aren't a sufficient safeguard against abuse of technology. Law enforcement is well known to use evidence laundering techniques to work around procedural safeguards.

[fiter]

I imagine we could come up with some way to handle this. For example, put the storage as a responsibility in the judicial branch.

[sneak]

I offer that if you believe this, perhaps you haven’t read many search warrant applications.

[fiter]

Do you think we should ban search warrants?

[sneak]

I think the determination of probable cause should be audited much more heavily, with a lot more in the way of penalties for judges for clearly wrong answers.

I also think the fact that there is essentially no consequence whatsoever for police plainly lying in warrant applications is a major oversight.

100% of the applications for granted warrants I’ve read have had clear factual errors in them, sworn under penalty of perjury (ha!).

We don’t even track what percentage of warrant applications contain perjury (~100% in my estimation), much less what percentage of those so swearing face consequences as a result (~0% in my estimation).

The system is broken.

[fiter]

If I can summarize: search warrants should not be banned but we should enforce the checks and balances that justify their existence in the first place.

I agree with that 100%. I dk believ that is orthogonal to using warrants on public surveillance. Maybe politically it might be a nice lever, though: we will authorize surveillance with this new system in place for all warrants.