I guess I support this for only "serious crimes". Probably best to limit it to violent crimes against citizens mostly for now (e.g. murder, etc), and then consider expanding it on a case-by-case basis.
It's a slippery slope situation. The same as how an invasive technology would first be used for the worst imaginable offenses that hardly no one would be opposed to. The critical thinkers would recognize the pattern that it's a foot in the door. Saying the ends justify the means in these cases unwittingly endorses the means used for other ends.
It's like saying "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply for serious accusations.
It's like saying "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply for serious accusations.