Excellent show guys.

Here’s my question, in regards to the entrapment story:

Why do the authorities feel that they need to get the guy to go so far through the process to committing an attack in order to control his actions and keep whomever they’re protecting safe? With all these warrantless wiretaps, data retention policies, cyber-security bills and whatnot…once they identify someone as a threat, why do they have to set up some complex scenario, why can’t they just use all the existing tools to target the individual for monitoring and wait until they actually move forward on a plan to intervene?

If they become the supplier and enabler of these plots, opening the door for people who would normally just be spouting off to transition into becoming someone who would go through with one, then why do they need any of these archaic, destructive, and privacy-infringing data collection policies and laws past the point of discovery of a disgruntled individual?

It seems to me that the number of tools they have at their disposal to combat such plots makes setting up these fake-bomb scenarios fairly inefficient and impractical, which is why I believe it crosses the line into entrapment. They COULD just monitor the person and intervene if they take any real action on their own…but instead they set up a honeypot scenario to catch the guy in the act…opting for that method crosses the line in my opinion.

-surfrock66