zlacker

Is that a bad thing? I would imagine the only people who don't like this are criminals. But why are so many seemingly law-abiding citizens here up in arms about it?

>>toephu+(OP)
A ton of people hold some of these core beliefs, which are subjective (meaning not exactly provable/disprovable) and aren’t subject to critical reevaluation:

• the federal government cannot be trusted when the president belongs to the other “team” regardless of whether the election was fair

• all decision makers in such a government are seeking a fascist and racist agenda that is a threat to all of us, and they are also seeking to harm anyone who even uses their First Amendment right to speak against them.

• therefore, they cannot be allowed to enforce immigration laws at all because we cannot trust them to not make any mistakes/break any rules

• the dangers of those rules being broken outweighs any dangers posed by criminals who happen to be undocumented immigrants.

• also as a result they cannot be trusted with any data that could aid in enforcement of laws or aid them in pursuing their political enemies.

>>toephu+(OP)
> I would imagine the only people who don't like this are criminals

The problem is that the system doesn't only work on criminals, there's rarely enough oversight to prevent abuse, and it's only going to get more invasive. There's been case after case where cops use it to stalk their ex-girlfriends/ex-wives or similar, for example: https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article29105...

>>toephu+(OP)
They collect data that allows tracking the movement and locations of individuals to a reasonably high degree of fidelity. Governments cannot be trusted to protect this data or to use it legally and responsibly.

>>toephu+(OP)
Yes it is. Mass surveillance is always a problem in every form.