There is just that stinky old Fifth Amendment that We The People wanted between us and a tyranny. Other than that, I suppose there is no reason.
Even it government could open all iPhones the user can still use encryption software making access almost useless.
“A policemans job is only easy in a police state”.
It’s no different than if I have a secret I won’t tell you.
Hold me in contempt, but you can’t make me tell you.
Providing back doors into encryption and devices only serves to make permanent vulnerabilities bad people will also use.
We need to trust our digital transactions.
When did this become a country where the government’s convenience trumps the rights of the people?
The source of evidence has not been eliminated. But the government must collaborate with the private sector to collect evidence, JUST AS IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN.
When a convenience store CCTV records evidence, the police must still collaborate with the private store owner to get the evidence. A court order can be obtained for finger prints. They have to collaborate with phone companies to get phone records. Blood Tests? Probable cause. The system works as it is. There is no need for the Government to have unfettered (but responsibly promised privacy) access to any civilian's life. They also do not need to impede on the business model of the private industry.
Throughout history, the private sector has mostly lead the way on technology innovation. The government has led the way in several areas that eventually found it's way to the private sector (GPS, RADAR, Nuclear Power, etc.). This situation is not as new or unique as the government would like us to believe.
“Are we certain we want to eliminate an important source of evidence that helps not only cops and prosecutors but also judges, juries, and defense attorneys arrive at the truth?”
Yes.
Right to remain silent.
Right to secure papers.
Right to not have government agents record your every word (even if only revealed under court order).
Not "what if"
There. That's all you need to roll your own practically unbreakable encryption software. And it fits nicely on a t-shirt. ... So you're back to the problem of anti-encryption laws only working against the law-abiding, being simple to evade for those inclined to do so. And I'll sell you the shirt if you want.
Yes.
If you’ve got nothing to hide, what’s the problem? </s>
“Are we certain we want to eliminate an important source of evidence that helps not only cops and prosecutors but also judges, juries, and defense attorneys arrive at the truth?”
Are you certain you want any hacker worth his salt being able to gain access to even the best secured devices? Because that’s what you are asking for...
I have yet to see a well reasoned discussion of this topic.
The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me
I guess the police couldn’t solve crimes before phones.
Strawman argument; if someone wishes to use evidence from (any) device in their defense, they can certainly use it. The problem, really, is that so many things are now considered illegal that giving a prosecutor your phone is ensuring that you will, indeed, be charged with a crime. And most likely, it will have nothing to do with what you were being investigated for.
As phones track your movement (many even count steps, and constantly update the GPS location, including velocity), your data footprint (including many sites where you're logged in already, meaning the prosecutor can now wander through all of those websites as well..), and what could be many years of photographs and videos.
Here's you picking up a rock at a national park - evidence of disturbing the natural environment which just happens to be a crime. Here's a picture of you smoking a cigarette on a public beach, another crime, or data proving that you were going 85 miles an hour on a very empty highway.
IF we could actually trust public servants to JUST do their job, and IF we could dial back the mass of illegal acts, then MAYBE were a judge to issue a very LIMITED search warrant, I could see something being done with that.
But ultimately, contemplate the following: Do you really want to give access to Afghani authorities who have decided to prosecute a Christian? Once opened for one law enforcement order or judicial order, Apple, as a worldwide company, would be subject to ALL law enforcement and judicial orders.
The government has giver up the moral right to this argument by directing the DOD spy agency (NSA) to engage in domestic surveillance.
The US Government collects more data on Americans every two days than the STASI collected in its entire 40 year history. (About 900 million pages)
Good for Apple.
Paper that can be burned, pencils that can be erased, and rooms without a government microphone also allow people to write and communicate in ways the government cannot access. The founders thought those communications should be protected from government oversight and self-incrimination and I agree even if technology has changed.
Also, when the government adds a tool to get around the legal or technological “problems” with surveillance, the real bad guys add a tool to avoid it. And WE are left being the ones who the government takes freedom from.
The CEO of Apple may have something to hide on his phone......