Apple should not have resisted the pressure of helping the FBI.
The terrorist should not have the fourth amendment.1st support -Whitt Flora “Cook refused to unlock Farook's phone to help the FBI's investigation of the attack. This refusal is hard to justify in an age when America and its allies are coming under attack from extremist groups.”The textual evidence is saying that apple has to justify for the fact of not helping. Even though Apple wants to protect people’s privacy and say the fourth amendment protects citizen’s privacy ,but terrorist are not citizens they want to hurt people so they do not deserve that right.
If apple Just said yes there might be a replay. Refute - Randall G. Holcombe “The FBI backed off because it was able to hack into the phone without Apple's assistance. However, the issues raised by this controversy have not been resolved and we should expect a replay in the future.” The FBI may have backed off but there is going to a replay and the same thing is going keep on happening. So it was kind of pointless that they said no ,plus they never said that they look in everyone's phone.
Cook should have not have said no because the FBI is behind because of him. 2nd support -Whitt Flora “ Cook’s action, now seemingly proven right, nevertheless has set back the efforts of the FBI to stop the actions of extremists by at least three months.”Since the CEO (Cook)said no they have stopped the FBI and now they need to catch up. Also since the FBI was in that court case they could have stopped some extremist or find them.
Apple should not have resisted the FBI pressure to let them hack Iphones because Extremist should not have the fourth admendment. The FBI will ask again and will not stop asking intel they get help. Now since Cook sayed no he put the FBI behind 3 months.