> Almost no day-to-day policing is done with warrants!

Just because I feel bad for taking advantage of the above statement, here is a snippet from "Warrants in U.S. Law: The Ultimate Guide":

  Imagine your home is your castle, and the U.S. Constitution 
  has built a protective wall around it called the Fourth 
  Amendment. This wall protects your right to privacy and 
  security from government intrusion. Now, imagine a police 
  officer wants to enter your castle. They can't just knock 
  down the gate; they need a special key. A warrant is that 
  key. It's not just any key, though. It's a special 
  permission slip, signed by a neutral judge (a magistrate), 
  that says the government has a very good, specific 
  reason—called Probable Cause—to believe that evidence of a 
  crime is inside your home, or that you have committed a 
  crime. This document acts as a crucial check on government 
  power, ensuring that law enforcement can't search your 
  property or arrest you on a whim. It's a fundamental 
  safeguard that forces the government to justify its actions 
  before it invades your privacy, protecting every citizen 
  from unreasonable searches and seizures.[0]

Policing enforces U.S. criminal law.

0 - https://uslawexplained.com/warrant_law

> Almost no day-to-day policing is done with warrants!

By this logic, there is no need for "day-to-day policing" to have warrants for:

  - phone taps
  - SMS messages
  - GPS history
  - email
  - banking information
  - justified arrests
  - court approved searches

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state

How many cops that we know of are on the hook for abusing flock access? Last I checked was around 50.