Isn’t it better for all parties if the user is informed that they’re being investigated?
This way they might stop from doing the act for which they’re investigated instead of actually carrying it out.
This way they might stop from doing the act for which they’re investigated instead of actually carrying it out.
But yours is a ridiculous conclusion that prison does not stop crimes. Of course sending you to the slammer STOPS the crimes you were going to commit.
Also, we don’t have to send criminals to the slammer. We can send them to live with you and your family, but something tells me your performative statements stop short of allowing that. And that is the issue, some people like you want “society at large” to bear the cost of crime, but don’t want to bear the cost themselves. This has to tell you everything you need to know. It’s basically suicidal empathy. I could ask you to ask Pava Lapere how that worked out, but she is dead.
This is like saying that an undercover agent must answer "yes" when asked by anyone if they are part of a law enforcement agency. What would be the point of being undercover?
The problem is the abuse of the invasive searching. If the evidence is compelling enough, then present that evidence to a judge and have a legit signed warrant. Unfortunately, there will be judges with a rubber stamp.