Paranoia Is Rational

On the heels of the California Supreme Court decision about cell phone searches comes a great discussion of what the decision means on a practical level from Ars Technica. Here's a quote I want to highlight:

A May 2010 study from the conservative Heritage Foundation and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers found that three out of every five new nonviolent criminal offenses don't require criminal intent. The Congressional Research Service can't even count the number of criminal offenses currently on the books in the United States, estimating the number to be in the "tens of thousands."

So, are you still certain you're not a criminal? To use my favorite example, just remember it is a violation of federal law (i.e. a crime) to use many cleaning products in a manner inconsistent with their labeling.

We've reached the point where the game is thoroughly stacked against Joe Q. Citizen. The .gov can find proof of some sort of crime, given enough evidence to parse. You may not think the .gov will ever be interested in you, and you may be right. However, given some of the more absurd examples of incompetence displayed lately, you may come under the crosshairs entirely by accident. Remember, its' not paranoia if they're out to get you.

Why give the .gov any help? Password protect your phone and don't talk to the cops.