a great loophole for the state

There's a lot of debate going around about the Kansas state attorney general's demand to see medical files from women who were given late term abortions. I really have no interest in debating abortion but I heard a very interesting defense of the AG from Judge Andrew Napolitano on the O'Reilly Factor tonight. I can only hope I misheard him say, "If you are a crime victim, you lose your right to privacy." Exactly what magical thing happens to a crime victim that they deserve to be twice victimized? Of course, some people will say "the defense of the child trumps" privacy and that's fine. That's a legitimate opinion but Judge Napolitano made a blanket statement about being a victim of crime not a perpetrator. If somebody steals my bike, can the state come to my house and ransack my lingerie drawer? If someone paints graffiti on my van, should the police come over and see what books I like to read? If my purse is snatched, should the Florida AG have a camera installed in my bathroom. If the state makes it illegal to eat oranges and I do anyway, do they have the right to find out what's in my bank account? Of course, not. You may not have a right to privacy, but the neither does the state have the right to inspect your life MORE than they do your neighbor's because you were victimized. A criminal yes but a crime victim? It only gives them more incentive to make everything illegal so they can control everyone's life. With each new law, they'll have two more people to hassle, the criminal and the victim.