The government’s use of surveillance and metadata collection has greatly increased since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Many Americans feel that this increase in surveillance is violating their privacy rights and the Constitution. The government can, and should, do everything it can to protect the lives and freedoms of its citizens. The National Security Agency is not violating the Constitution by electronically collecting information from American citizens, and the data collection is necessary to keep Americans safe by preventing future terrorist attacks. Many Americans are uncomfortable with the fact that the government can access their personal phone records and other electronic information, but some privacy needs to be sacrificed to save the lives of others. The NSA has successfully prevented over 50 terrorist attacks since 9/11 due to the new surveillance technology being applied (Sullivan). The NSA tracks the location telephone calls were made from, who was being contacted, and the duration of the call (Mukasey). However, this information is just being collected, and not analyzed (Mukasey). When someone contacts a know terrorist organization, or if there is reasonable suspicion that a person is tied to a terrorist plot, the NSA just has to look in its database to find the information it needs to prevent the attack (Turner). If the NSA did not have a database that stored these phone records, terrorist organizations would not be able to be stopped and identified as efficiently. Since the government only uses this information to stop terrorist plots, innocent Americans should have nothing to fear, or hide, by letting the government access their phone records. If giving up some personal information is what it take... ... middle of paper ... ...pare for an epidemic, which increases efficiency and decreases ER wait time (Lehrman). This demonstrates just how crucial metadata collection is to national security. If this lag time were applied to terrorist situations, the military would not have time to prepare and prevent attacks on American citizens. The issue of government surveillance should never have been an issue. It has only benefited and protected American citizens. It has not violated Americans’ privacy rights and it remains constitutional. Metadata collection helps provide a means of tracking and preventing terrorist attacks; this could not be done efficiently without access to personal information and phone records. New uses of the Internet are only helping secure the lives of Americans. People need to place the value of human lives over their concerns of who can access their electronic information.
The aftereffects of the September 11, 2001 attacks led to Congress passing sweeping legislation to improve the United States’ counterterrorism efforts. An example of a policy passed was Domestic Surveillance, which is the act of the government spying on citizens. This is an important issue because many people believe that Domestic Surveillance is unconstitutional and an invasion of privacy, while others believe that the government should do whatever is possible in order to keep the citizens safe. One act of Domestic Surveillance, the tracking of our phone calls, is constitutional because it helps fight terrorism, warns us against potential threats, and gives US citizens a feeling of security.
In America we take freedom and privacy for granted, we as people are unable to comprehend how safe our country actually is, especially in today's society. With that being said there is something that we must all understand, in this age of technology if people are not surveillanced it puts everybody else in our country and the country itself at risk. There are aspects of our privacy and life that we have to sacrifice in order to secure the freedom that we do have. The NSA and U.S. government needs access to our private information in order to ensure the safety of our country and citizens.
The NSA is a U.S. intelligence agency responsible for providing the government with information on inner and foreign affairs, particularly for the prevention of terrorism and crime. The NSA maintains several database networks in which they receive private information on American citizens. The agency has access to phone calls, emails, photos, recordings, and backgrounds of practically all people residing in the United States. Started in 1952 by President Harry Truman, the NSA is tasked with the global monitoring and surveillance of targeted individuals in American territory. As part of the growing practice of mass surveillance in the United States, the agency collects and stores all phone records of all American citizens. People argue that this collected information is very intrusive, and the NSA may find something personal that someone may not have wanted anyone to know. While this intrusion's main purpose is to avoid events of terrorism, recent information leaks by Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, show that the agency may actually be infringing upon the rights of the American citizen. Whether people like it or not, it seems that the NSA will continue to spy on the people of the United States in an attempt to avert acts of terrorism. Although there are many pros and cons to this surveillance of American citizens, the agency is ultimately just doing its job to protect the lives of the people. Unless a person is actually planning on committing a major crime, there is no real reason for citizens to worry about the NSA and it's invasion of our privacy. The agency is not out to look for embarrassing information about its citizens, rather, only searches for and analyzes information which may lead to the identification of a targe...
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
According to John W. Whitehead, “The fact that the government can now, at any time, access entire phone conversations, e-mail exchanges, and other communications from months or years past should frighten every American.” (Whitehead). The NSA
Since the terrorist attacks at Sept. 11, 2001, the surveillance issue often has turned away the table in the debate of individual privacy or counterterrorism. By passing the Patriot Act, Congress gave President Bush an immense law enforcement authority to boost U.S's counterterrorism, and the President used his enlarged powers to forward specific programs in order to reduce the threat of terrorism and defend the country’s safety.
...vil rights and losing protection. Protection is more important but unnecessary spying should not be tolerated. “The sad truth is that most Americans have already lost the battle when it comes to keeping personal information absolutely private.”( Lee, M.Dilascio, Tracey M.4).
It is a well-distinguished fact that the government loves using surveillance – a surveillance’s easy accessibility, regardless of the threat they pose, verifies the government’s love. Surveillance is a part of the government’s life. According to ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), just six weeks after the September 11 attacks, the government passed quite a lot of legislative acts, such as the USA/Patriot Act, that would allow the government to watch doubtful actions. The act was a revision of the nation's surveillance laws that allowed the government's authority to spy on the citizens. The Patriot Act made it easier for the system to gain access to records of citizens' actions being held by a third party. Similarly, Section 215 of the Patriot Act allowed the FBI to force many people - including doctors, libraries, bookstores, universities, and Internet service providers - to turn in information on their clients (“Surveillance Under the USA PATRIOT Act”).
This is a false logic considering that everyone has something to hide or be private about. Every American has done something minor wrong once in their life from the perspective of someone else, but that doesn 't mean they are criminals or should be under suspicion of terrorist activities. By the government having access to phone records and other important metadata, they are putting everyone in America under scrutiny. The other side may argue that If people don’t break laws by implementing illegal hustles, they should not be afraid of tracking. According to this logic, it is acceptable for somebody who has nothing to conceal to be stopped in the middle of the street and be searched. Chances are that this request will cause a citizen’s indignation because of the invasion of personal space. Then why is domestic surveillance, which is simply a little more sophisticated way to invade privacy is still exist? It would be agreed upon by the majority of Americans that it would be completely unethical to randomly stop a person in the streets and ask them to show an authority figure their text messages and personal information for no reason.As Huffington Post explains in the article I Have Nothing to Hide: Government Surveillance Does Not Concern Me, "I wonder how many people in the "I have nothing to hide" category would feel differently if instead of unwarranted internet or phone surveillance, police officers routinely looked into people 's homes through unobstructed windows and opened doors as a ways of monitoring criminal activity? Most of us would find this type of unwarranted government behavior unacceptable, unconstitutional, and un-American.(end quote) Electronic government surveillance programs and other programs in place by the government are just as intrusive and unconstitutional as this
How would you feel if everything you did on the internet, every text you sent, and every call you made was seen by someone? That is what the NSA is doing right now. According to Wikipedia, the National Security Agency is a national-level intelligence agency of the United States of Defense, under the authority of the Director of National Intelligence.[1] They have been a controversial topic since the 1970s when it was revealed that they had been wiretapping Americans’ telephones. Their surveillance has only grown since then, even though most Americans disagree with it. [2] The NSA’s domestic surveillance is unconstitutional, ineffective, and a violation of privacy that needs to be stopped.
After 9/11, the government has worked to improve and be more secure in order to prevent another attack from happening. With the battle between protection and privacy, there are already other forms that are happening. For instance, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents at airports are allowed to confiscate your belonging, look through your bags, scan your body and bags, and physically touch you. This form of monitoring is physical and just because everyone is searched does not mean that you are a bad person and they are targeting you. Same exact thing with online monitoring, it is not because the NSA does not trust its own people, it is simply a procedure that has to be done in order to provide us safety. These procedures have been a result of 9/11 and it must be reminded that it is all for the protection of all Americans. This is all vital for the safety of Americans because although many are not terrorist these bad people may be among us and they must be identified in order to track them. Most recently, the San Bernardino Attack which took place on December 2, 2015 is claimed to be the deadliest attack since 9/11. Syed Farook, one of the attackers was born and raised in the United States, this is very alarming because terrorist can even be Americans themselves. In “San Bernardino attackers 'did not post about jihad on social media’ ” the FBI Director James Comey mentions “Instead they expressed support for martyrdom using "private direct messages”." The San Bernardino Attackers did not show on their public social media profiles any links to the support of Islam or any suspicious activity but between then they talked about it privately, that is where the whole situation could have been prevented. Another tragic attack was the Boston Marathon attack “Since his death, it
The government gives each American citizen a set of unalienable rights that protect them from the government’s power. These rights cannot be broken, yet the government violates the Fourth Amendment daily to find ways to spy on the American public under the guise of protecting against terrorism. In 2007 President Obama said the American administration “acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our securities – it is not.” Americans need to understand that their privacy is worth the fight. The people need to tell their neighbors, their congressmen, and their senators that they will not allow their internet privacy to be violated by needless spying. American citizens deserve the rights given to them and need to fight for the right to keep them by changing privacy laws to include Internet privacy.
As we already know, the National Security Agency has already stopped about forty-nine homegrown terrorist plots in the United States. Now had these plots actually gone through and happened, many lives would have been lost. In fact, according to President Obama, lives have been saved directly because of the program. Opponents of mass surveillance may argue that the National Security Agency is violating rights, but no rights are being violated at all. People still possess their constitutional rights, including their rights to free speech, their rights to practice their religion, their freedom of the press and other the rights provided in the Bill of Rights. According to Roger Pilon, Vice President for Legal Affairs at the Cato Institute, the National Security Agency only collects metadata, or data regarding the person who made the call, the location, and other general information, but not the name of the person linked to the phone number. In 1979, in Smith v. Maryland, the Supreme Court ruled that using pen registers to track phone calls was not unconstitutional. Pilon goes on to state that, the names linked to the phone number are only granted once the National Security Agency is granted a warrant, just as required by the Fourth Amendment. Furthermore, once a warrant is granted to view the contents of the communication, that content can only be used for matters of national
There has always been surveillance of the general public conducted by the United States government, the usual justifications being upholding the security of the nation , weeding out those who intend to bring harm to the nation, and more. But the methods for acquiring such information on citizens of the united states were not very sophisticated many years ago so the impact of government surveillance was not as great. As a result of many technological advancements today the methods for acquiring personal information - phone metadata, internet history and more - have become much simpler and sophisticated. Many times, the information acquired from different individuals is done so without their consent or knowledge. The current surveillance of people
The fourth amendment of the constitution states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue.”(United States Constitution). The government’s surveillance violates this right, as collecting sensitive information of individuals is an “unreasonable search.” However, the NSA is currently utilizing a loophole that allows them to cull data without a warrant. According to Axel Arnbak from Harvard University’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society, this exploitation of the loophole may leave Americans “as vulnerable to surveillance, and as unprotected as the internet traffic of foreigners.”(Whittaker).. An instance of data collection conducted beyond the law was Project MUSCULAR. According to CBSNEWS, Project MUSCULAR consisted of collecting approximately “180 million user records from Google and Yahoo datacenters.”(Whittaker). The project was able to be accomplished because the data gathering occurred overseas. These projects indicate that the government is taking advantage of the loopholes in the law to gather as much information as possible. CBSNEWS also mentioned how the 9/11 terrorist attack brought the patriot act into existence. The patriot act lets the government collect data to fight terrorism. However, a warrant is required in