CMV: If you believe in privacy for yourself, you should believe in it for others, including those who commit crimes.

Privacy is important, not just in your personal life, but also in your work and social life. You don't want your work projects freely available to the public unless they specifically are meant to be, you don't want your friends knowing your personal life, stuff like that. Privacy is one of those things that you would think is just about common sense. But usually when I see the idea of privacy being defended, it's defending the privacy of you and me only. That's incorrect.<br><br>This should also extend to criminals. If we want privacy, we should want criminals to have privacy as well. And that may sound like a pretty controversial claim, because the vast majority of us aren't thieves, murderers, and rapists. But the argument isn't about the nature of the crime, it's about the nature of privacy. If privacy is important, it should be important for all of us, not just "good people". In fact, you could even make a more solid case for criminals having privacy than you or me. If somebody commits a crime, do they not have a right to privacy? Is it not important that they have a right to privacy? If you say no, that they do not have a right to privacy, than you have to take the position that privacy is based on merit. Essentially, good people deserve privacy, while bad people do not. But privacy, by definition, is about having your personal stuff be yours alone. So why should you, and not a criminal, have that right to privacy? The answer is that criminals should have privacy.