I'll put aside for the moment that the 4th amendment was (and is) not part of the United States Constitution (although it would seem that a self-proclaimed Constitutional scholar as yourself would know that), and suggest ..
Originally Posted by LexusLover
Did you just argue that amendments to the constitution are not part of the constitution? Holy shit. It doesn't take a constitutional scholar to know that they are, in fact, part of the constitution the moment they are ratified. All it takes is grade school knowledge of the constitutional process.
"So where is it in the Constitution of the United States of America ("COTUS" AKA the "defining document") that the issue of Apple being protected from the government intrusion into the phone in which Apple imbedded an alleged "encryption" software covered? Please show your "prowess" as a constitutional scholar! Since we are just "chatting" here!"
You think you have me in a "gotcha" point, but, as usual, it is a strawman. Let me repeat something I've said to you already, in this very thread: "I'm not arguing whether or not they can legally do this" and "There may be some legal precedent (set by people who don't fully understand the technology) that makes this legal, I don't really know. But I am talking about the philosophy and spirit of the constitution of the matter, more than whether or not it is currently legal for them to do so." and "But, I also noted earlier that it was less about whether or not the state could convince the courts that it isn't unconstitutional, but describing how I believe it violates the spirit of those protections." I've repeatedly said to you that I am not in an debate about the legality of it. Hell, this is no longer a strawman, but a blatant misrepresentation of my argument.
The "problem" the knee-jerkers (who call themselves "Libertarians" and "anti-Government") haven't yet grasped is: The argument they use against Apple assisting the FBI in extracting the information off the phone is a PERFECT argument for the prohibition against the manufacture and distribution of handguns in the United States.
"They can end up in the hands of criminals."
Originally Posted by LexusLover
Actually, what I've said is that this technology would make us less safe, not more, citing the fact that it would almost certainly fall into the wrong hands. But, apparently, what I've said is of no actual importance to you. Only what you wish I had said.
I guess their "top secret bullshit" on their phones is more important than firearm ownership and possession.
Again, another strawman. No one here has made any claim of having "top secret" information on their phone.
Maybe this is a debate for another time, but, really, we live in the information age. People in America are being victimized far more by people stealing their information, rather than being the victims of physical crimes. In many ways, it is arguably more important for our own safety that our information be secure than we be secured by guns.
On top of that, information and secure communication is massively important in conflict. As the saying goes "WWII was won with British Intelligence, American steel and Russian blood." The intelligence they are referring to is the cracking of the German ciphers so we could read all of their communications. So if there were ever a need to rise up against the government, the ability to communicate, without the government being allowed to snoop in, is vital to security from the government. It might
actually be more important than our physical arms, at this point in time, considering there is no way we could compete against the US army, on its own soil, if they could simply listen to everything we say.
LE historically has "examined" computers AND phones of known criminals, and/or those suspected of having committed a crime. That's the reason why "we" (at least I've noticed what they were carrying out) have seen Federal, State, and Local LE on news broadcasts carrying CPU's out of places where known or suspected criminal activity has occurred or the place where a suspected criminal and/or victim has kept their computer (including lap tops) and confiscate their phones for forensic examinations.
Originally Posted by LexusLover
Again, strawman. No one is this thread is saying that they can't examine the phone. What I am saying, at least, is that they should not compel apple to create a backdoor so that the government can bypass the encryption. If the state can get into the phone, they can go right ahead and do it.
