That's going a bit far. People May use encryption for illegal activities. What possible use does the DUI checkpoint software have, outside of enabling drunk drivers?
The point is that it doesn't really matter. The very first constitutional amendment ensures that the government's power is limited such that it doesn't need to evaluate the content of its citizens' speech.
Freedom of speech is expressly limited in cases such as hollering "Fire!" in a crowded theatre. How about defeating police efforts to catch murderers? Child molestors? Drunk drivers?
Seems like its not cut-and-dried is all I'm saying.
Then why isn't the app called "traffic stop"? Its called "Tipsy" or something like that. It covers only DUI traffic stops. Who is this marketing to? Who is buying it? We all know the answer.
Yes, its good to protect freedom of speech. Its also good to make the streets safer. And DUI is a real problem, not a strawman.
Just like if it were a major, road-blocking accident, the answer for me (and I'm sure many people who were not sober) was U-turn and reroute. There's no reason why law abiding citizens should have to be inconvenienced by these dubiously effective law enforcement efforts, and if there's a tool based on protected free speech that allows us to avoid them, so much the better. LE can catch drunks in other more effective ways that don't inconvenience the law abiding citizenry.
http://www.albuquerquecriminallawyerblog.com/2009/09/uturn-t...
The principle being defended here is that you are free to share that information under the 1st amendment, however the method of sharing may be performed. It's the reason being a member of the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church and saying hateful things doesn't automatically make you a criminal. Whether you agree with the speech or not shouldn't affect it's possibility to be spoken.
It's an invariant property of the rule of law that when something isn't explicitly illegal, it's legal. And yes, many "free" western countries do have problems with this.