I think the “lives saved” by invasions of privacy are greatly exaggerated. I hate to put it like this, but it’s accurate to say: Many lies about the effectiveness of such programs have been propagated–even by members of Congress.

A congressman from your state was going about boasting about 54 terrorist attacks were stopped by the NSA program. And then reality came out, either he was severely ignorant or lying. The NSA deputy directory testified that it only thwarted 1 and “contributed” to 13 other actions.

One “threat averted” claim that has been bandied about recently was surveillance that nabbed a taxi driver who was giving money to al-Shabab in Somalia. Yes, al-Shabab is classified as a terrorist organization, however….. it isn’t so simple as that. al-Shabab was also his tribal group–a group he has a long standing identity with based on where he came from. It can hardly be proved that he had any intentions to support terrorism, nor can that violation of his privacy be proved to be linked to a particular terror plot. And the amount of money he gave was hardly significant in terms what it could accomplish.

So, I think we also need to simply be careful about even accepting such numbers about “lives saved” uncritically.

Like many other liberties, privacy is a liberty that has value even when it isn’t “needed”. Like you’ve said, violations of privacy create an environment where even actions that don’t need privacy persay. There is also a powerful “self-censorship” that occurs when there is a lack of privacy.

It’s also curious that the very agencies that are insisting on violating privacy are actually quite private about their own activities!

We can’t have an expectation of privacy in all contexts of life, but we need some. It isn’t healthy to be always watched. And good civic hygene requires a good balance where people know there are “safe” areas where they can speak their mind and communicate privately.

If the government can step in and listen to our conversations at will or even if they can view how many times a member of the congregation called you or a client of mine called me it could potentially violate our privileges. To say nothing of violating the 4th amendment.