[kabdib]

The problem is that "imminent risk" tends to creep downward over time, to the point that it becomes "imminent risk that a citizen unit will improperly fail to bow and scrape."

If you're going to shut off several thousand cell phones, you can bloody well get a judge out of bed for that.

[anigbrowl]

Perhaps, but I don't think it's fair to judge this bill on how legislators might amend it in future, or we'll never pass any laws at all.

[CodeDiver]

Laws have unintended consequences. It's good to slow down the creation of laws and weigh tradeoffs. Laws are intended to be solutions. But the cure may prove worse than the disease.

[mikeash]

Can we judge it on how the police interpret these things now?

For example, the police are only supposed to shoot people when there's imminent risk of death or great bodily harm. Yet there is routine, if not common, overreach there, including one notorious recent incident that people are currently protesting with great vigor.

If you can't reliably enforce the rule that police aren't supposed to kill people except in dire emergencies, how will you do it for cell phone kill switches?