That sounds like a problem with trust in the US Government. As I said in a later post, I don't really see how these tools are significantly legally or practically different than the sort of wire-tapping technology that Governments around the world have been using for well over a hundred years.
We, in the United States, have considerable legal protections over our privacy. The FBI or other law enforcement agency is required to obtain a warrant before placing a listening or other surveillance device. The CIA is legally prohibited from conducting operations within the United States itself. If those laws are being avoided or broken, then that is a matter that needs to be addressed. But the mere existence of a hacking tool (in the hands of our intelligence agencies) is not - in my mind at least - any more of a danger than a machine gun or tank in the hands of our armed forces.
The CIA, NSA, and FBI are not staffed and run by people who are either fools or professional voyeurs. Before any surveillance or intelligence-gathering operation begins it undergoes a cost-benefit analysis. Deploying and maintaining such tools, and collecting and analyzing any form of data recovered requires resources of time, materials, and money. These expenditures have to be balanced against the value, in terms of increased national security, that they deem like to achieve. It simply isn't worth it for them to snoop on ordinary people's smartphones or televisions. In the case of the zero-day exploits detailed in the most recent Wikileaks revelation, intelligence agencies are going to deploy such tools extremely sparingly, and to only the most valuable targets, since widespread distribution is likely to shorten its life as a useful espionage tool.
