The case pits constitutional rights of privacy and protection from
unfair police tactics against high-tech government surveillance. In my
opinion, since police are already free to conduct surveillance by simply
following someone, I don’t see a difference between trailing someone by
car, on foot, or using technology. In effect, they all do the same
thing and produce the same outcome don’t they? I would have ruled in
favor of upholding the information gathered by the FBI to be used in the
case. The world we live in now is different
and I feel that government and law enforcement agencies should be able
to use different types of technology at hand without warrant. I
understand that everyone is entitled to their privacy, but If you don’t
have anything to hide, I really don’t see what the problem is if it
makes the world a safer place.

apply to these post 2-3 sentences. agree or disagree