🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1gRFTB3w165w@works.uucp> ferret@works.uucp (Dave Ferret) writes:
> 
>If the communications are encrypted, what determines 'probable cause' and 
>use for a warrent when the material contained within would be unknown.

This is easy to answer if you use the "War on Drugs" as a model of current
law-enforcement definition of "probable cause":

- a tip from an informant
- you fit an "established profile"

People have been killed by police raids (WA, TX, CA) in their residences for
"suspected drug dealing" when in fact, the police had the wrong address or a
bogus "tip" from an informant with a grudge.

Sorry, Dr. Denning, but I no longer buy the government's specious arguments
that we need to safeguard against "terrorists, organised crime and drug
dealers." Unless they start to provide hard statistics and documented evidence
of the "good" they have done in all these assaults on civil liberties, I'm not
of a mind to surrender any more of my liberties for the "common good."

dsa
Usual disclaimer: My opinions. Lawyers need not apply.