No, I disagree with him and I pointed out the section to him, as well.
Where this goes from my perspective on people saying this is such an egregious abuse of people's privacy is the following. You'll have a police officer who will have to get internal approval to go to a court to say to a judge that he or she has reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred or may occur. They go through their internal chain of command to get approval to go to court. They then go to court before a judge and convince the judge of their reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred or is likely to have occurred, which is, of course, reasonable. The judge then allows them to obtain transmission data. Somehow that internal approval plus judicial approval equals abuse. I'm not good at math, but to me that seems to be an equation that does not add up, because there are enormous safeguards in that process.