Fair enough...

However, what about the instances of "hot pursuit"??

Would you feel comfortable with the guidelines that operatives should vigourously pursue leads WHERE EVER it takes them, but be prepared to justify their actions to a judge after the fact??

My beef with the "Las Vegas Incident" is that people are willing to accept police going thru alleged personal records AFTER a terrorist attack in order to determine who is guilty. Yet, these same people are indignant if the same police go thru the same records BEFORE the fact, in order to PREVENT loss of life on a massive scale.

In short, their attitude is that, as long as hundreds or thousands have died, they don't mind that their alleged privacy is invaded. But god forbid that their precious privacy would be violated to PREVENT those hundreds or thousands dying...

Speaking for me personally.. I don't feel that my privacy is worth anyone's life...

But, maybe that's just me....

Michale.....

My answer to your question is that as long a judge has reviewed the evidence and determined that there is probable cause to issue a warrent then the government can request the information. It is when there is no judical review and the constitution and the laws of this country are ignored that I have a problem.

...Stan

Oh com'on, CW!!!

The states knew what the money was supposed to be spent for...

The states receiving the money are (allegedly) run by responsible adults who know what the money SHOULD be used for...

That's akin to laying the blame on Bush because it's raining on someone's parade...

Be that as it may, there IS such a thing as "narco terrrorism"... And surely the link between narcotics and funding of terrorism can be made in placing like Afghanistan.. Is it really such a stretch to believe that there is a link between narcotics and terrorism in the US of A??

You know me.. I have a cop's mentality thru and thru... If it takes invoking "terrorism" to prevent the rampant expansion of drug trafficking or gangs expansion or whatever, is that really a bad thing??

I am sure if you asked the law-abiding residents of inner-city slums if they are "terrorized" by gangs and druggies, you would get definite "HELL YES!!"

Does ANYONE have a problem curtailing the illegal drugs trade, regardless of whether or not it's actual "terrorism"???

@fstanley

"we will no right to privacy whatsoever."

The right to privacy ends where the danger to innocent people's lives begins...

Your statement reminds me of the huge Las Vegas New Year's situation. People whining and complaining that the US Government had access to their Vegas hotel records because they had a tip (that proved to be bogus) that Las Vegas was going to be the subject of a devastating terrorist attack.

Let me ask you... Do you feel it's justified for the US Government to obtain hotel and motel records if they have reasonable suspicion that a terrorist attack is planned???

Michale.....

Where's the door, how do I get out of here!

Eyeopening post
...Stan