I have absolutely NO problem with law enforcement gaining access to stuff like web habits when appropriate. But I do not think it is too much to expect that they make a case for it being appropriate by going through the warrant process. I don't mean to make light of the job law enforcement professionals do. It is hard work with potentially serious ramifications when they drop he ball or get bogged down in unnecessary red tape. There has to be a balance somewhere. However, from what I understand warrants are not too hard to get. They can even be granted by telephone 24/7 in dire circumstances.

--Previous Message--
: Canadians' online surfing habits could be an open book for both
: the US and Canadian governments if several pieces of legislation
: in both countries become law, says a US online privacy group.
: The Electronic Frontier Foundation released a statement on
: Wednesday arguing that a proposed new law in the US designed to
: help fight cyber-threats " is likely to have serious
: implications for Canadian civil liberties ."
:
: The Cyber-Intelligence Sharing & Protection Act (CISPA),
: which stealthily made it through a US House of Representatives
: committee last December, gives businesses and the US government
: the legal immunity they need to share information about Internet
: users.
:
: Critics call it an end-run around existing privacy laws. The
: American Civil Liberties Union told The Huffington Post earlier
: this month that the bill's definition of the data that can be
: shared with the government is overly broad, and the government
: would have the ability to use that information, for the most
: part, as it liked, including using it for criminal
: investigations without a warrant. The group also criticized the
: bill for not requiring the data to be made anonymous before
: handing it over to the government.
:
: That proposed law could have serious implications for Canada
: because of the Beyond The Border Initiative Canada signed with
: the US in February, 2011. " Somewhat ironically given the
: borderless nature of the Internet, the Initiative envisions a
: secure cyber perimeter in addition to the secure physical
: perimeter it seeks to put in place ," the EFF writes.
:
: The EFF notes that the Initiative commits Canada to "
: real-time information sharing " between cyber-security
: operations on both sides of the border. The cross-border
: partnership " may mean that Canada will have to meet
: whatever US cybersecurity (read: online spying) regime is
: ultimately adopted ," the advocacy group OpenMedia wrote
: on its website this week.
:
: The potential jeopardy to Canadians' privacy stemming from the
: initiative is not lost on Canada's privacy commissioners, who
: released a joint statement earlier this month calling on the
: Harper government to " ensure that improvements to
: Canada-US security and commerce do not jeopardize Canadians'
: privacy rights ." The commissioners noted that their
: concerns have so far been ignored in the government's
: development of the cross-border partnership.
:
: Besides the US-Canadian partnership, the EFF argues that two
: pieces of legislation working their way through Canada's
: Parliament, when taken together, essentially mimic the US CISPA
: bill.
:
: First there is Bill C-12, which " significantly expands
: " the conditions under which companies can share
: information about Internet users without customers' consent.
: " It will permit telecommunications companies to hand over
: customer information to any organization seeking it for the
: purpose of performing 'policing services', a term that is
: increasingly being applied to public-private cybersecurity
: partnerships ," the EFF wrote.
:
: The other bill is C-30, commonly known as the " online
: spying " or " lawful access " bill. The EFF
: refers to " a provision granting organizations - including
: telecommunications companies - immunity from 'any criminal or
: civil liability' if they voluntarily decide to preserve
: customers' information or share it with law enforcement. This is
: evocative of the civil and criminal immunity CISPA offers US
: companies for handing over their users' data to the United
: States Government ."
:
: However, it's uncertain what Bill C-30 will look like when it
: comes to a final vote in Parliament. The Conservative government
: sent the bill to committee for major revisions last month, after
: taking severe criticism from media and the public over its
: provisions. (However, digital law expert Michael Geist reported
: earlier this month that a Parliamentary committee is actually
: pushing to expand online surveillance powers in the bill, rather
: than restricting them.)
:
: Signs are also emerging that CISPA could face a backlash, not
: unlike the SOPA controversy, which prompted major websites to go
: dark in protest of the bill that would have given the government
: the power to block access, without judicial process, to websites
: deemed by private companies to be infringing copyright. The
: White House strongly criticized CISPA this week, saying it
: lacked safeguards to protect people's privacy.
:
: And Facebook found itself having to defend coming out in favour
: of the bill, arguing the legislation is needed for companies to
: legally share information about cyber-attacks. " When one
: company detects an attack, sharing information about that attack
: promptly with other companies can help protect those other
: companies and their users from being victimized by the same
: attack ," Facebook stated.
:
: The San Francisco-based EFF has teamed up with several Internet
: freedom groups, including Canada's OpenMedia and the Canadian
: Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC), in Stop
: Cyber Spying Week , a series of events planned this week to
: protest the various legislative efforts to expand government
: powers online. Events include a Twitter and letter-writing
: campaign, which appear to have had an effect: Politico reports
: that Facebook, IBM and other tech companies backing CISPA have
: been under verbal attack this week.
:
: