The problem is that cops think they have to aim for/hit 100% crime stoppage when that is impossible to do and keep a free society. It is an accepted understanding with the idea that we are innocent until proven guilty that the OJ's of the world will be set free from time to time. It is not a situation that cops should be given all the tools to stop all the crime at any cost. [I love the story of a police dept that used a Stingray to catch a 911 caller that was pranking them. I mean REALLY?]. That world would truly not need guns for us, the people, to be able to protect ourselves and instead would hand over our freedom to a sanitized hell that places like CA/NY seem to be driving towards. That is a place where they will protect you from the bad guys with guns, tell you what you can eat or drink, tell you what is fashionable or not, etc. The only cost, is conformity. It sounds like a dystopian movie from Hollywood to me. Cops/Government need to understand that 911's will happen in a free world and the people need to understand the same thing. There have to be limits. You can't blame the NSA/FBI/Local cops for every time something bad happens. Prepare yourself for what you can as best as you can and take indiviual responsibility. This bridges the gap between what the cops can do and what we the people can do. We need to get it so that both sides allow for the rights of the other without demonizing or trampling of rights. We need to get to a point where both sides see each other as allies instead of this backdoor BS that kills trust and thus people on both sides. The ignorance of those that espose 'Pivacy is dead' only conform to the ideals of big brother is soul killing. While it is certainly true that privacy is difficult in today's world, to accept it as inevitable is to give up a basic right of every American. George Washinton, Jefferson, Hamilton all lived in a world that did not afford privacy, only loyalty to the crown. To not understand this fundamental foundation of the Constitution is to not understand what it means to be an American. To give up these rights to the Government or Corporations without a fight is to give up on what this country was founded on.

Just my .02, disregard as seen fit.

Quote Originally Posted by cstone View Post
I believe Irving posted this story last year: http://www.radiolab.org/story/eye-sky/

The technology exists. We as a society have to decide whether catching criminals/terrorists is worth the ever present eye of government. IMO, this is an ethical question to be made by a society with a decreasing value on ethics.

Where and when do we have a reasonable expectation of privacy? I certainly expect that anything I do outside of my home is observable by any number of people and technologies scattered in both public and private locations. This particular technology does not prevent a crime but may assist in locating those who did commit a crime, which may in turn prevent future crimes that could be committed by those same people. The story points out a critical weakness in our current system of intelligence gathering; we do not have enough analysts to analyze the data in a timely fashion. Why have an alarm if no one is available to respond when it goes off?