I don't feel like this ruling changes my chances of being falsely accused of a crime at all. All it really does is take away a tool police could use to find the right person.
There is no reasoning with "privacy advocates" on this. Your argument is essentially "think of the children" to their ears and they're used to blocking it out categorically without thinking.
No amount of "checks and balances" and "valid scenarios" will convince them otherwise. They've decided that their arbitrary notion of privacy is some sort of "human right" and will drag us all to hell because of it. In the meantime, they refuse to participate with lawmakers to tread a middle-ground so the laws end up being utterly draconian (see the EU stuff happening in real time) against ordinary citizens.
Oh and don't even get me started on the kicker, whereby most of law-enforcement simply refuses to enforce and prosecute the bulk of uncomfortable crime they encounter (see the US and UK right now where they let criminals loose on their populace because they're afraid of the "optics").
I honestly don't know what kind of f-d up world we're leaving to our children. But they will judge us very harshly for it someday.
I don't feel like this ruling changes my chances of being falsely accused of a crime at all. All it really does is take away a tool police could use to find the right person.