That's step one. Step two is to make warrants more than just a rubber stamp. Step three is to make law enforcement, prosecutors and judges less incestuous. Step four is to bring more accountability to the law enforcement and judicial systems. Maybe sometime down the line we'd get something that resembles justice.

> Maybe sometime down the line we'd get something that resembles justice.

It will be welcome.

"The defendant enters a plea to the charges brought by the U.S. Attorney at a court hearing known as arraignment. More than 90 percent of defendants plead guilty rather than go to trial."

* http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/types-cases/cri...

"In 2013, while 8 percent of all federal criminal charges were dismissed (either because of a mistake in fact or law or because the defendant had decided to cooperate), more than 97 percent of the remainder were resolved through plea bargains, and fewer than 3 percent went to trial. The plea bargains largely determined the sentences imposed."

"[...] the prosecutor-dictated plea bargain system, by creating such inordinate pressures to enter into plea bargains, appears to have led a significant number of defendants to plead guilty to crimes they never actually committed."

* http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2014/11/20/why-innocent-peop...

Lots of variations but Plato's version resonates with me. "The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ... We're at 18 signatures now ... let's get a few more...

It's much more complicated than simple indifference. The US has a horrible education system and mass media. Self-interest, anti-intellectualism, paranoia, and xenophobia run rampant. Most people lack basic knowledge of American history, never mind much knowledge of the rest of the world's history.

As a result, even when there is political involvement, it often stems from ignorance and fear, and is easily manipulated by the politicians and the media.

Also, the NSA is funded by government debt. One of the reasons we got off the gold standard was government spending in the first place.

Whilst true, those are neither distinctly American, nor recent, phenomena.

J.S. Mill on 19th century Britain, via Hans E. Jensen:

First, the universities were given the task of providing an unceasing supply of ideologically correct candidates for vital positions in government, church and business. The state was able to make the faculties of the "'venerable institutions'" of higher education, or rather indoctrination, assume this duty because it controlled appointments and held the purse from which "emoluments" flowed into the coffers of academics. Hence the members of the university "hierarchy" made it their "business, the business for which they . .. [were] paid," to "uphold certain political as well as religious opinions," namely those of the "ruling powers of the state" (Mill 1981: 429: and 1988b: 350). Thus the universities pursued with vigor their assignment to inculcate in their students those political and ideological views that were cherished by the power elite. The graduates of the ancient universities were, therefore, well prepared for employment in, and by, those institutions that were instrumental in perpetuating the existing maldistribution of income. All of this might come to naught, however, if the masses of the underclass should achieve anything approaching success in potential attempts at throwing off their fetters.

The state devised a second educational strategy in order to prevent such a calamity from occurring. According to Mill, the "elementary schools for children of the working classes" were given the task of ensuring that the poor would continue to accept docilely their dismal station in life. It was very easy for the state to force the public schools to assume this role. It did so simply by failing malignantly to allocate sufficient funds for the operations of what Mill identified contemptuously as "places called schools" (Mill 1982: 200; emphasis in original). These places were therefore understaffed. Moreover, the few teachers who were actually employed were completely "unfit for their work."

Hans E. Jensen, "John Stuart Mill's Theories of Wealth and Income Distribution". Review of Social Economy. Pages 491-507. Published online: 05 Nov 2010.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00346760110081599

I don't believe this attitude is a US-thing. It's a human thing, regardless of education and background. Singapore, Russia, China, the UK, India, Israel, all have different levels of all the above and I don't see any one of them being an exception in this regard.

"I support this..." pages are okay. However, I prefer to call and write congresscritters and senators directly, saying either:

"Hi, I'm a constituent, and I believe senator/critter XYZZY should vote for/against the PLUGH legislation because..."

or

"Hi, I'm not a constituent, but I'll contribute to senator/critter XYZZY's next election (or his or her opponents) depending on the PLUGH issue."

A couple hundred dollars in the right place is probably worth more than a couple hundred signatures.

That would be nice but it is like asking a heroin junkie really nicely to stop getting high and then leaving them sitting there with a needle in their hand.

This is the new war on drugs. And it's not going away until something worse replaces it.

Something like an implanted thought-veto-filter, that replaces seven ounces of your brain with nanotechnology to govern approved thoughts (...or detonate a subcranial kill squib).

They also need to make it fully and permanently accountable.

When East Germany fell and the Stasi archives first fell open and then were deliberately opened?

The people spying now need to know that, one day -- preferably not too far distant -- every one of their actions will be public record. And that they, and their descendants (by public declamation if not law) will be held accountable.

Transparency, when exercised, needs to work in both directions.