Specifically, the family of British soldier Lee Rigby — who was murdered by Islamic extremists in 2013 — has spoken out about Apple’s decision to refuse a court order to break into the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone. Rigby’s family says Apple’s stance is “protecting a murderer’s privacy at the cost of public safety.”
Speaking with the BBC, Rigby’s uncle, Ray McClure, claimed that Apple is being, “short-sighted.” He continued:
“I would hate to see on the streets of London another murder like happened to Lee Rigby, I’d hate to see another attack like happened in Paris. How many victims of crime are not getting justice because of Apple’s stance?”
As much as I support Apple’s position on user privacy, there’s no doubt this is a complex (and enormously emotive) issue. McClure himself argues that, “I’m not saying take encryption off the iPhone, but there has to be a balance.”
The question is what that balance might be — and whether Apple should be pressured into allowing the possible threat of terrorism to push it into helping set a precedent for the erosion of user privacy.