Don't see how that's a lot better. As long as the database exists, it has potential for abuse later. No reason to think the courts are more ethical than the police.
except that where we have this three strikes for civilian criminal activities we should have a one strike and your out for public officials
Their motivations will be far more transparent than those of gov't level entities. Also, you can respond to your house getting robbed by adding locks, bars, camera's etc. If a gov't level entity is abusing you, your options are much more limited. That's why nipping over-reach in the bud is important.
One large database that requires a warrant to access can at least be more easily held to higher standards.
In general, it is always better to let the lowest possible authority level handle something. If parents can handle it, the city shouldn't take it over. If the city can, the state shouldn't. If the state can, the Fed shouldn't.
The police or other law enforcement, however? These are folks that not only can abuse the power, but use it to factually or falsely accuse me of a crime. That's enough to ruin a life. You don't even need to be convicted for it to cause serious life issues, sometimes for years. These are the very people that I should be able to turn to when someone abuses it, and I am under the impression they would cover up their own abuses ... much like they do now.
The same really goes for politicians, but the scenario is different.