In short, at the risk of trivializing the argument:
The ability to gleam private details about people is having some power over them. The entire modern theory of government rests on limiting and dividing up the power of those in power. With mass surveillance, that balance is broken. Not only do we have private details on individuals, that knowledge is held by a small and unaccountable elite, protected by state secrets.
Even if you live completely lawfully and morally and truly have nothing to hide you can either:
1. Unwittingly do something illegal (there are too many laws on the books for anyone to know they are completely innocent); or do something that can be construed as such, since the police and prosecutors can be fallible;
2. Still live in a society where a small group of individuals can exert blackmail and intimidation on a significant proportion of citizens. Even if that power would be rarely used, it creates an environment of fear. People start to be afraid to speak against abuse, those in power stand less for their own scrutiny.
The "unwittingly do something illegal" is the most common refutation I've heard used. I think it's the most powerful as an example of the fallacy of this argument and an example of how unwieldy our laws have become in the United States.
A coworker used the following story, apt since he lives in a state bordering another country: "Let's say I go to Canada for a day trip, Montreal perhaps. I speak enough French to get around but it's not so good after an evening of drinking and socializing. The next morning, I wake up with a powerful hangover headache. A pharmacy is nearby, but my head is pounding too hard to read the labels so I go to the pharmacist. In broken French, I ask him for some Tylenol. He asks me 'what kind?' 'Just one,' I reply. He sells me a small bottle with a Tylenol label; I pop a couple and put the rest in my bag. After I return home--declaring 'nothing' at the border, of course, since I forgot about the bottle of medicine--I find the bottle and notice the word 'Codeine' on the label. Canada sells 'Tylenol One,' a compound with this addition. I'm technically guilty of felony drug trafficking of a schedule 2 narcotic into the United States as well as felony concealment (drugs). Are you certain you've never done something seemingly innocent that's actually a serious crime?"
I think the problem with laws like the one you mentioned is that they aren't perceived as a threat because of selective enforcement. Assuming your posting reflects the legal situation correctly, many people who consider themselves law abiding citizens have committed a felony, but it is only enforced on, say, the guy who gets into an argument with a cop at a traffic stop and then has his vehicle searched.
While that is much worse than a law that can and will be enforced broadly, people will paradoxically seem to perceive it as less of a threat. The problem is that there are many such laws, which accumulate into a weapon the authorities have against you. You may be accused of something totally absurd (putting up a light installation in public), but instead of having to back down after discovering you aren't a terrorist, the authorities will find a law that will allow them to hold you responsible for their excessive reaction, or at least "punish" you for them embarrassing themselves.
This is why I think society would, to some degree, benefit from radical transparency. If all crimes were punished, people would be much more motivated to actually fight unjust, overly broad or unspecific laws, because everybody knows that they will be affected.
Personally, I have made a conscious decision to go out of my way to preserve my ability to start every unwanted encounter with a cop by asking him for the reason he stopped me and for his badge number (a right I have in my country), even though that may not be what I would actually do. However, that means that I cannot so some things I consider OK but aren't legal. But then, I live in a country with reasonably simple and understandable laws, even for a layperson.
Are you sure about this? Reading wikipedia suggests only 90mg or higher unit dosage falls under Schedule II narcotic. You may not be guilty after all :)
This is not a helpful comment. The anecdote is not suggesting that everyone who commits an accidental crime is trafficking Tylenol One. It's a story about how a small action can turn out to be a felony. This has been true in other cases that have nothing to do with Codeine.
Ok, how about another example: you buy a box or two of Cuban cigars in Canada and smuggle them home to the US in your suitcase. This is a crime, but millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens have done stuff like this.
Good point. I'm not all that versed in US drug laws. However, having seen a whole bunch of signs when doing cruises, I imagine that telling the Customs agent that you have a bottle of medicine containing codeine isn't a good idea since Vicodin and the lot are only available by prescription. Either way, his point is still a good one, I think: Even if you're the most open and giving person on the planet, do you really want to court fate like that?
I remember an old black and white film where a bad guy planted an illegal substance on another character (a trival slight of hand) and then sicced the police on him.
With possession laws, someone else can make you into a criminal without any intent or even awareness on your part.
Given the number of sexual and other scandals that have come to light regarding Congressional representatives in the past few decades, one wonders how many have been blackmailed, and how many are currently being blackmailed.
The ability to gleam private details about people is having some power over them. The entire modern theory of government rests on limiting and dividing up the power of those in power. With mass surveillance, that balance is broken. Not only do we have private details on individuals, that knowledge is held by a small and unaccountable elite, protected by state secrets.
Even if you live completely lawfully and morally and truly have nothing to hide you can either:
1. Unwittingly do something illegal (there are too many laws on the books for anyone to know they are completely innocent); or do something that can be construed as such, since the police and prosecutors can be fallible;
2. Still live in a society where a small group of individuals can exert blackmail and intimidation on a significant proportion of citizens. Even if that power would be rarely used, it creates an environment of fear. People start to be afraid to speak against abuse, those in power stand less for their own scrutiny.