How to reply to arguments promoting violating privacies for safety?

[UltraWright]

Whenever privacy violation by the state is brought up authoritarians say that the state has to violate privacies or else it will not be able to detect terrorists. How can one reply to that argument?

[piet11111]

Well you could always throw Ben franklin in their face.


He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither

[tracher999]

with to words FUCK YOU:cool::D

[Tjis]

Organized crime and the big terrorist networks have ways to avoid being detected. They use cryptography, steganography (hiding information in apparently harmless pictures for example), they daily change e-mail addresses, they use networks of middle men to transfer information (making sure no one person knows both the source and the destination of some piece of info), they use dupes to do their dirty work to stay out of harm's way themselves, etc. They have decades of experience with such things.

Massively violating the privacy of civilians is not going to put an end to this at all. It is just ordinary civilians that are harmed by this.

[piet11111]

Organized crime and the big terrorist networks have ways to avoid being detected. They use cryptography, steganography (hiding information in apparently harmless pictures for example), they daily change e-mail addresses, they use networks of middle men to transfer information (making sure no one person knows both the source and the destination of some piece of info), they use dupes to do their dirty work to stay out of harm's way themselves, etc. They have decades of experience with such things.

Massively violating the privacy of civilians is not going to put an end to this at all. It is just ordinary civilians that are harmed by this.

combine all that with the simple fact you need to know about them before you can even begin to track them and you have a huge problem on your hands.

[Psy]

Whenever privacy violation by the state is brought up authoritarians say that the state has to violate privacies or else it will not be able to detect terrorists. How can one reply to that argument?
One word COINTELPRO, how many KGB agents did the FBI catch with its illegal unrestrained counterintelligence program? Not many since the FBI was far more interested in spying on leftists, the FBI didn't care that KGB agents had agents all over Washington DC when there was labor movements to crush, along with youth militancy. Leaked COINTELPRO documents also point to the FBI working with organized crime to crush militant labor movements, meaning the FBI rather cut deals with the mafia then let militant unions organize.