Obviously this type of thing is going to continue to happen. And given the nature of the way this was uncovered, it's likely happened many times previously.

I doubt it would ever come to pass but what we need is a law that specifically parses out information incidentally uncovered under such demands and allows individuals to deny the use of such incidentally uncovered information in further proceedings.

Certainly, we all believe "the gubmint" is out to just collect as much info as possible for future use. And obviously it's also being claimed that if these scopes are being illegally sold to known terrorist organizations, it's "all hands on deck."

Both are not with validity. Now obviously, such fish finding missions do lead to uncovering other illegal activity -- which findings, have in the past, often been deemed inadmissible based on suspicious discovery by law enforcement.

While we all hope that this demand fails and future such demands are also turned away, there "oughta be a law" against use of evidence "incidentally" dragnetted.

It's just like fishermen are allowed to use a dragnet but they have to ensure that they are throwing back the non-targeted fish. It's the Dolphin Safe Tuna of law enforcement information gathering.