FBI used geofence warrant in Seattle after BLM protest attack, documents show

I do not see why the warrant requests data over such a long time frame. It seems likely to me that you could identify the perps from the mobile phone records by simply limiting the warrant request to 5 minutes before and 10 minutes after the event. There will be less data to sift through and the longer window after the event will allow you to track them to a vehicle or a nearby residence, etc. If the perps were carrying phones then they should be identifiable.

This warrant is overly broad and will pull innocent people into the investigation including people who may not have been participants but who may have only been in the neighborhood while it was happening and just decided to stop and take a few pictures to pass on to people in their social circles. (Social media cancer sufferers unite!).

A crime was committed and it is right to make an effort to locate and prosecute those responsible so that society has an opportunity to hold people accountable for their actions.

Once you dig into this you find another situation where it is true that if event A had never happened, then the likelihood of event B occurring is near zero. This event is the event B and in order for justice to be served, those who were involved in event A need to be held accountable. Committing crimes in an attempt to force accountability will not improve the situation for anyone and will likely only result in someone who would otherwise have enjoyed a happy, productive life being locked up for a crime of passion that should never have happened (event B).

We need technology that erodes the thin blue line serving as a refuge for cowards seeking to escape accountability for their crimes. Molotov cocktails chunked at a police station will never be that technology. I don't know what it looks like but there are some smart people on this forum who may have useful ideas to promote.

1. Issued in relation to attempted arson, which I think we all agree fits closer with "serious crime" than "civil disobedience"

2. The warrant is detailed and specifically identifies two specific subjects, identified through CCTV footage and described in the warrant.

3. Is approved by a magistrate in a federal court.

4. Is issued for a specific location and a specific timeframe (75 minutes).

5. Is for a specific record of movements during the location and time, without account details, before the FBI asks which account details they want to subpoena.

Let's look at the fourth amendment:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

Was the application made under oath? Yes.

Is there a specific place? Yes, both in terms of space, and in terms of time.

Does it clearly describe what to be seized? Yes.

Has a warrant been issued by a Magistrate after review? Yes.

Sounds good to me. I oppose mass surveillance (fuck you, NSA), but this seems constitutional and reasonable to me.

By definition, hundreds of innocent persons will now be in an FBI database and will be investigated. Once you are in that database, you won't get out of it. After all, perhaps you'll be tagged in another dragnet operation.

Even if you aren't interrogated or harassed otherwise, perhaps you'll be searched more often by the TSA or magically stopped more often for "traffic violations". Or perhaps you won't get that job at a government agency.

Although frankly, the solution is simple. Use 24hr burner phones and never when making outside contact with someone...