Maybe it would be acceptable to do something like that "in a time of war". The problem with today's government is that it seems to define everything in terms of

Maybe it would be acceptable to do something like that "in a time of war". The problem with today's government is that it seems to define everything in terms of an endless war. Cyber-attacks? "We're at cyberwar". Terrorism? "We're at war with all the nations harboring terrorists". Domestic terrorism? Well there's already the "war on drugs", so they probably don't care that much about that one, as long as they still get all the powers they need inside the country, too. 9 in 10 NSL's are used for drug cases, actually. Surprised? Such sustained surveillance - indefinitely - is simply unacceptable, and people need to fight back against it. If the nation really is at some sort of "long term war" with multiple enemies, then maybe the nation is doing something very wrong, and should look at the root cause of what's causing those enemies to react, rather than trying to fix the problem later with surveillance. The problem is maintaining the war status quo is so very profitable for certain people and companies.