I don't see how putting everyone in a huge radius, journalists and those otherwise uninvolved included, under investigative suspicion and location surveillance to respond to what is only charitably described as an insurrection (the group was almost entirely unarmed) is in any way reasonable.
It seems like a massive overreaction. If we're truly interested in democracy and the rule of law, we'd do well to not shred our standard democratic and legal procedures (such as the presumption of innocence, and the fourth amendment's prohibition on searches without probable cause) the instant a few thousand angry, unarmed yahoos show up with pitchforks and banners and achieve precisely nothing.
We shouldn't even do that if a few thousand armed, trained people show up, with the express intent of doing battle, taking control, and holding territory (which, again, to be clear, is not what happened). We absolutely should not do it when a bunch of idiot yahoos break windows and set off fire extinguishers and steal shit.
Even had the building burned to the ground, universal surveillance such as this would not be a proportionate reaction.
I don't see how putting everyone in a huge radius, journalists and those otherwise uninvolved included, under investigative suspicion and location surveillance to respond to what is only charitably described as an insurrection (the group was almost entirely unarmed) is in any way reasonable.
Huh?
Don't get me wrong, I actually agree with you on overreach. But this action is completely reasonable because it's standard operating procedure for many law enforcement departments around the nation. Most of us simply do not reside in the neighborhoods where these tactics are employed. None of what we are discussing today is even Patriot Act type stuff. It's just standard law enforcement investigative technique. Worse, our law enforcement infrastructure already took the exact same actions during the BLM riots. None of the people complaining now, uttered a peep at the time.
I said all of that to say this, as a privacy activist, I learned decades ago that the best method of protecting my rights is to protect the rights of others. The issue today, is that most who complain are called out as hypocritical. With good reason. We can't go back now. Law enforcement would be accused of racism. Whatever tactics we used on others, we have to use now. And law enforcement gets to use them because people were not forward thinking enough to protest these methods when they were designed and employed during the latest stages of the drug war. Or even just a few scant weeks ago during the BLM riots.
I'd just encourage everyone to be more forward thinking on these issues. Sometimes complaining only when the issue affects you creates more problems than it solves. It makes it more difficult to get legislative changes made because certain key organizations, and people, whose cooperation we need have to double down on their positions so as not be called out as hypocritical themselves. AS a consequence, we come into headwinds trying to get the changes necessary to outlaw these practices.
What is the harm that is incurred when the tower records are transferred from the operator to the government?
Is it just too scary of a slope to stand on or something?
To me it seems to fit under 'reasonable' for the government to issue a warrant for presence information in the locality of the capitol. Given the 3rd party doctrine that probably isn't what happened, but the objection there would be more procedural than about control over data stored on servers.
The state collecting this information is a public hazard, especially considering the relatively recent development of the assassination of US citizens without trial.
It seems like a massive overreaction. If we're truly interested in democracy and the rule of law, we'd do well to not shred our standard democratic and legal procedures (such as the presumption of innocence, and the fourth amendment's prohibition on searches without probable cause) the instant a few thousand angry, unarmed yahoos show up with pitchforks and banners and achieve precisely nothing.
We shouldn't even do that if a few thousand armed, trained people show up, with the express intent of doing battle, taking control, and holding territory (which, again, to be clear, is not what happened). We absolutely should not do it when a bunch of idiot yahoos break windows and set off fire extinguishers and steal shit.
Even had the building burned to the ground, universal surveillance such as this would not be a proportionate reaction.