
Orlando is why we need surveillance - anigbrowl
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/06/16/orlando_is_why_we_need_surveillance_130901.html
======
bluejekyll
The real problem in this case wasn't the surveillance, it was that after
flagging this guy, they could strip him of travel rights, i.e. air travel, but
they didn't have a means to deny him access to guns.

The NRA have made it nearly impossible to deny anyone access to guns. It's
harder to get a driving license.

If they thought he was to great a risk to fly, he should have been too great a
risk to buy and possess guns.

------
anigbrowl
I post this not because I agree with Harrop's thesis but because it's a good
exemplar of a mindset that is frequently ignored on HN, resulting in a sort of
groupthink.

~~~
orangecat
There are vaguely plausible arguments for mass surveillance, but this is just
incoherent. It doesn't actually propose anything other than "shut up about
privacy". The Orlando scumbag was brought to the attention of the FBI twice
without the need to monitor everyone's communications. Doing what the author
seems to want (again, it's hard to tell what that is) would result in a vast
increase in false positives, making it even easier for future terrorists to
slip through the cracks.

