So it's big news now that the US gov't has been gathering ungodly amounts of data on Verizon customers in search of terrorists. Also, the FBI has sued Google for the access of millions of people and their browsing habits in search of terrorists. In both instances, without a warrant and without an actual suspect. With the US's fear of terrorism we have begun to go down the road of being a policed state. This started with the Patriot Act, continued with warrantless spying of Americans and circumventing FISA and --as Americans were reminded recently-- the signing of the Telecommunications Act of 2008. But when is enough enough? How much does the government have to know about your and your habits so they can stop terrorists? Is there a line that can even be crossed at this point? If so, what is that line? Our friends across (UK) seems to have --well what I feel is-- intrusive government surveillance. CC cameras on every corner. But I'm sure that anyone in the UK, can point to that and say, "they've prevent crimes domestic and abroad and helped catch criminals". And most likely they've been around for so long now, that they've probably gotten used to them. It's like the show Big Brother but in real life.
In short, are these expansive laws necessary or is this just inefficiency, bureaucracy, and panic at work?