By Carlos Gamino

It’s generally accepted wisdom that if you don’t break the law, you don’t have anything to worry about. But what happens when people get into a he-said, she-said situation with police?

Police are sworn officers of the law, so it’s not surprising that what they say carries a little more weight than what an accused criminal says. However, with organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and a handful of others making it easier to record police encounters, the fires of suspicion are continually being stoked. (The ACLU launched a “Mobile Justice” app for smartphones that live-streams encounters to their database; if people want to retrieve them for evidence later, they simply request them through the organization.)

It really seems like there’s a genuine distrust of police sweeping the nation. Most police don’t deserve it.

Maybe it’s due to the fact that every confrontation between police and civilians makes it on the 6 o’clock news and spreads around Facebook like wildfire.

The story of a Texas officer knocking out a woman in front of her 6-year-old daughter in April, for example, has thousands of “Likes” and comments, as does video of a police officer punching a woman who, at the time, was 9 months pregnant.

There’s no doubt that these officers may have reacted the wrong way to the situations they were in; I don’t think anyone would dispute that. However, the rate of distrust is growing.

Experts aren’t sure what we should do. We have police hosting “Coffee with a Cop” events and this incredibly amazing day that police spent one day before Christmas. While these things do a little, they’re not solving the problem – and at this point, nobody has the right answers.

How would you change public perception of police, or do you think it doesn’t need to be changed? I’d love to hear what you think, and it’s a discussion we all need to have. Share your thoughts on my Facebook page and let everyone know what you think!

Carlos Gamino

Carlos Gamino, a criminal defense lawyer in Milwaukee, is always interested in privacy laws. Here’s his take on whether the government can—or should—listen in on your phone calls.

 Your phone calls are your own private business. That is, until the government has a reason to listen in. Wiretapping and accessing call records are accepted practices that have been going on for decades. With court approval, the government and police can request cooperation from phone companies to listen in on your conversations.

In fact, a 2014 report from Vodafone, one of the world’s largest cellular companies, revealed that government snooping into phone networks happens extensively all across the globe. This may come as a surprise, but according to Vodafone, many countries even demand direct access into Vodafone’s networks without providing a warrant or prior notice. The report included all of the 29 countries across Europe, Africa and Asia in which Vodafone operates.

Recently, however, the U.S. and the United Kingdom have been accused of taking things one step farther. They’re accused of hacking Dutch SIM card manufacturer Gemalto’s private data and stealing the encryption keys that secure communications between mobile phones and cell towers. These keys allow snoopers to decode phone conversations and text messages.

With the attack, the hackers—whomever they ultimately prove to be—hit the motherlode. Gemalto operates in 85 countries and fabricates about 2 billion SIM cards each year across 40 manufacturing facilities.

To put the scale of the incident into greater perspective, the SIM card hack gives its perpetrators the ability to monitor a significant portion of the world’s voice and data cellular communications… and they can do it all secretly. That access spans across major telecom networks, including some of America’s largest like Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile, and approximately 450 other wireless providers around the globe—all clients of Gemalto.

The hack is likely to involve many American consumers since nearly 90 percent of U.S. households use wireless service and 39 percent of them are wireless-only, according to 2013 data reported by international non-profit wireless communications organization CTIA.

While many countries put a heavy emphasis on their citizens’ privacy, governments around the world have become increasingly vigilant against terrorism and other potential threats. In many cases, they view wiretapping as a mechanism necessary to help ensure the safety and well-being of their people.

What do you think? If the U.S. and the United Kingdom really are guilty of hacking Gemalto, were they justified in doing so in the name of national security?

What do you do to protect your own privacy? I’d love to hear your opinions, so please, drop by my Facebook page and let me know.

Carlos Gamino