Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Privacy control in 1984
Privacy control in 1984
Privacy control in 1984
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Privacy control in 1984
Outline
Topic:
Why does the NSA violate personal civilian security. Simple for National Security. I am trying to make a policy that allows the Pentagon, CIA, and the NSA to securely access personal civilian files without reasoning for the security of trying to root out the Terrorists, Traffickers, and the Sex offenders. There is an algorithm that can Identify any person by the way they type, because not every person types the same way. The Federal Bureau of Investigation uses this to lock in on key people on the internet or any device that has an Ip or Internet Protocol address. My reasoning for trying to make a policy that could be so detrimental to these groups of people is simple if you have nothing to hide they why would one care about privacy.
Issue:
There are a lot of issues with this policy, one in particular is why does the whole world have to know what I am saying on Twitter or Researching on the internet. My answer to that is the whole world does not and will not have to know. Privacy among the nation's citizens is very important, I am a firm believer in that fact that Joe Schmo and Sally Sue down the street should not have to worry about me because I am not a problem for them. My
…show more content…
How the policy will address the issue:
After 9/11 the United States was hurt because of terrorist activities. The terrorist that bomb the base and flew a plane into the twin towers were taught how to fly by some means. If they had been caught before the act then thousands of men, women and children would still be alive. Those terrorists were taught on American soil by American flight instructors. These men had learned at a local airport in Florida. This new policy will act as a Minority Report in order to stop terrorist attacks before they start.
Plan for
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.
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.
Current advancements in technology has given the government more tools for surveillance and thus leads to growing concerns for privacy. The two main categories of surveillance technologies are the ones that allow the government to gather information where previously unavailable or harder to obtain, and the ones that allow the government to process public information more quickly and efficiently (Simmons, 2007). The first category includes technologies like eavesdropping devices and hidden cameras. These are clear offenders of privacy because they are capable of gathering information while being largely unnoticed. The second category would include technologies that are used in a public space, like cameras in a public park. While these devices
It transcends the line between public and private identity. When all of someone 's private information is being watched, then who are they as a person? Citizens cannot allow their identity to be confiscated for the protection of the unknown. Tamara Thompson states in her article Overview: What is Domestic Surveillance? that, the NSA has constructed a program that lets it hijack almost anything. Using this skill, most American 's information is automatically taken in, without a purpose. What is America 's deepest and darkest secret? Because what might be a secret, will be known to someone. With the hindsight of constantly being over watched, then how can America freely do what they please? Insecurities will consume the mind with the thought that the NSA, or someone like it is watching us. Not only is it hurting America emotionally, but it is hurting America physically with the economy. These government agencies are making numerous unnecessary purchases every day with the attempt at securing our homeland. Why is it necessary to live in constant paranoia if the majority of America is doing nothing wrong? There are other ways to stop terrorism, and spying on the public is not one of them. Domestic surveillance is not necessary by any
September 11th 2001 was not only the day when the delicate facade of American security was shattered, but it was also the events of this day that led to the violation of the rights of millions of American citizens. After relentless reprehension by the American masses on the approach that was taken after the 9/11 attacks ,the Bush administration enacted the Patriot Act on October 26th, 2001, a mere 56 days after this tragic event.The Patriot Act expanded the authority of U.S. law enforcement agencies so that they could hopefully avert future terrorist attacks. Under the Patriot Act The NSA (National Security Agency) could entrench upon the privacy of the citizens of the U.S. without public knowledge, consent or, probable cause. The particular incident which had the general public up at arms was when the NSA illicit surveillance came to public knowledge.
The United States government is up to its ears in the personal information it has collected from its citizens. Americans are becoming increasingly “aware of these slowly eroding walls of privacy,”(Hirsh) and more than half polled admit concern “about the overall accumulation of personal information about them “by […] law enforcement, government, […] and other groups,” though “they accept it as an unavoidable modern phenomenon” (Hirsh). The question is, how far is too far to trust the government with the collection, proper storage, and usage of this information? Studies show that “Americans believe that business, government, social-media sites, and other groups are accessing their most personal information without their consent” (Hirsh). People should be given the ability to admit or deny access to their personal information. The government does not have a right to use whatever information it wants for any purpose it wishes. Michael Hayden, once the NSA director for seven years, says, “Even I recognize that it's one thing for Google to know too much, because they aren't putting me in jail. It's another thing for government, because they can coerce me” (Hirsh). The United States government's ability to collect information about its citizens and residents should be restricted by what kind of information it can take, how it can acquire it, and what it can use it for.
Most people in society think they don't have anything to hide. Everyone has the Right to privacy in technology, medical, personal life and many more areas. Its all has been an issue, sense as far back as anyone can remember. Most people in society don’t realize that it’s a much bigger issue than what it sounds to be. As many of you may not know but the 14th amendment has been involved in may cases that had to do with the Right to Privacy.
The National Security Agency, known as the NSA, is a government organization that was founded in 1952. They started spying on US citizens after the September 11 attacks, under President Bush, to try to prevent more attacks. Now, the NSA is collecting metadata, the data that is about data, and actual data, so that they can try to stop terrorists and other criminals (“Mass”). Although the NSA is trying to stop the criminals and terrorists, most of the time, they are unsuccessful. The NSA is fundamentally incapable of achieving its goals because of the endless nature of the internet, the incompatibility of the NSA’s actions with its ideals, and the negative stigma that the NSA possesses worldwide.
Terrorism, it's one of the worst things that can ever happen to mankind. The NSA’s goal is to prevent this horrible threat and save lives. So far the NSA has prevented 54 terrorist attacks around the world. Take a second to think about how many lives have been able to be lived because of this. Many people would say the NSA are stalkers and should not be doing what they're doing, tell that to the thousands of lives that have been saved. As of right now the NSA is monitoring about 200 phone numbers for FBI security. That means you have less than a 1% chance of being monitored. Unless you are a terrorist with evil plots, I highly doubt that the less than 1% of people being “stalked” is you. This is why the NSA is barely an infringement on privacy.
Surveillance is the monitoring of the behaviour, activities, or other changing information, usually of people for the purpose of influencing, managing, directing or protecting them. The right of human beings basically entails freedom to basic things of life, part of which includes freedom to life, speech, vote and movement, all which are known as fundamental human rights. But with the advents of technology and the growth in the society, these have led to the development of satellite cables, which are used to monitor events at certain places with or without the knowledge of the residual/residents. Thus, the use of satellite cables has made the world a global village.
Have you ever looked up while in a public place and noticed a camera watching you? While some people may be alarmed, others feel a sense of safety and protection. Electronic surveillance consists of cameras in public places to watch over the city streets or parks. Their purpose is to allow policemen and the state government to know when crime is happening and where in the city. Cameras provide a great advantage of protection over just having police officers patrol the cities. These men and women cannot be everywhere at one time, but the cameras can. Electronic surveillance should be accepted worldwide because it can identify criminals and decrease crime in cities.
In this mindset, privacy is a very miniscule price to pay for the “greater good”. The average American citizen should have no fear of anything happening to them with this relinquishing of privacy. They are protected from both the government and any perceived threat, because an average American has no tendency to criminality and because the government may now be able to locate any threats before they become a problem, respectively. If a person has nothing to hide, they should not have any problem with letting the government take possession of mass amounts, if not all, of their personal information.
Using surveillance and investigation the government would be able to detect if someone has committed a crime and imprison them based on the evidence. If the person did not commit the crime they would go free and their name cleared. Yet these suspects have not been jailed before hand. In this scenario, why is it ethical for the government to surveill these people? The reason that this is considered ethical is because the government knows how to carry out surveillance and the proper people trained in information gathering are carrying it out and the information is being properly handled. Police officers, detectives or other officers of the law, those who carry out surveillance are trained in it and know how to handle the information gathered. They are the correct people to verify someone’s innocence because they know how to verify innocence or guilt. Surveillance does have a valid purpose of verification and justice, and if the alternatives are worse, nonexistent or need surveillance to supplement the evidence then it would be necessary to use surveillance and the purpose is proportional to the means of surveillance. Their cause is valid, if a crime has been committed to maintain justice and the safety of the people it is
A major reason the U.S. needs to increase restrictions on the type and amount of data collected on individuals from the internet is due to the fact that the United States government can track communications and browsing histories of private citizens without warrant or cause. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, ...
What is privacy? Google defines privacy as the ability of an individual or group to seclude themselves, or information about themselves, and thereby express themselves selectively. But is that everyone’s definition of privacy? Definitely not. The issue about privacy and how online social networks leak personal information is constantly being debated by writers. The articles “How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life” by Jon Ronson, “What ‘Public’ means Now” by Clay Shirky, “Why Facebook Privacy Settings Don’t Matter” by John C. Dvorak, and “Privacy and Social Media” by Theodore F. Claypoole all argue about the what the main issue is with online privacy. Is it Facebook’s fault, the internet’s fault, or an individual’s fault? Each person thinks that it is something different which is why this issue has yet to be solved. With personal information becoming more and more public each day, everyone agrees that there is an issue with online privacy. However, a solution would emerge much quicker if everyone debating the issue agreed on who