It is exactly this attitude that we need to change. I presume you saw my comment from a day ago, when I pointed out that before 1968, local phonecos were doing wiretaps without any sort of court order, ...
I'm still waiting for somebody to show that the majority of crimes that are investigated using subpoena power are "malum in se" crimes, as opposed to "malum prohibitum" ones.
Jim Bell
Have you read _The Hacker Crackdown_? I think it is pretty clear that part of what was going on there involved law enforcement people deliberately punishing BBS operators for behavior that was wicked but not illegal--basically facilitating communications involved in committing crimes (credit card number theft and the like). The punishment consisted of seizing the computer and backups and holding it for a year or so as "evidence"--without ever filing charges. Conceivably the owner could have taken legal action--but doing so would give the law enforcement people an incentive to file charges, thus imposing large costs on the owner even if he was innocent of any crime and could eventually prove it. I suspect that a good deal of this goes on in most law enforcement systems, in one form or another. Charging and convicting people is costly, even if they are guilty--and there is often behavior that law enforcement people want to prevent that is not even illegal. On the other hand, there are lots of things police can do that impose sizable costs but do not require a conviction, such as arresting you, holding you in a cell overnight, but never actually trying you for anything. David Friedman David Friedman School of Law Santa Clara University