More handpicked essays just for you.
Advantages and disadvantages of using technology in crime prevention
Why government surveillance is necessary
Why government surveillance is necessary
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The government should have the power to go through text messages, calls, and emails as a form of protection. When people are up to no good, the government can check people's media and technology to see if they are communicating with other suspicious people. When a criminal uses emails to interact with his friends, the government can track this down and potentially to stop the crime and save lives. This is a good form of the government invading privacy because it is for the good of the people. Many may claim that this still violates rights, but are not aware of all the times where government has stopped crimes and plans to potentially commit crimes. The people also need to know that if their innocent, they shouldn't have to worry about their privacy being invaded. The government is better off knowing what its citizens are up to.
Opponents may argue that the government is not entitled to watch over us and/or invade our privacy, however those people are not aware that this invasion of privacy stops crimes. For example, the NSA has managed to stop countless acts of terrorism targeting the
…show more content…
One day when my family and I were at a car dealership, we had to fill out forms and sign documents. The person that was helping us out, said he needed to ask questions about my dad’s background to see if he knew the answers. The man whom was asking the questions, asked things about who and where my father lived in at an early age. He also asked about his brother’s life and other personal questions I didn’t even know myself. If the government knows this much about the average citizen, I can almost imagine what they have recorded that they don’t reveal. They have the power to go through emails, text messages, and some claim phone calls. It shouldn't matter if they're using it as surveillance. No one even the government, should have the power to go through private messages like
In an article written by James Ball he explains that the NSA collects “pretty much everything it can”. Ball explains that the NSA collects information from everyone “including of individuals under no suspicion of illegal activity”. The NSA “collect(s) all available information from all available sources all the time, every time, always” is also said by the Domestic Surveillance Directorate, implying that the NSA collects information from phone calls, messages, internet browsing history, emails, and any other possible mediums of information. This is unacceptable as a lot of private information that is being held by the NSA is from people that are not under suspicion of illegal activities. Yes, the NSA is gathering information from everyone so it can identify threats before people have a chance of attacking. However, not everyone is a threat to the safety of the general public so storing the information of all people is not justified. It would be understandable if the NSA just analyzed text messages, phone calls, and other sources of information to be able to determine if someone is a potential threat and store their information only if they are a suspect. One’s text message should not be stored if it does not show any potential threat. People’s transaction information should not be kept if it is not a suspicious transaction. Apart from the NSA analyzing
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.
Government seems to take away more privacy than they say they protect. In 1984 the citizens were constantly being monitored no matter where they were, there was no escape. "It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away" (Orwell 62). Members of the party were constantly being monitored, at even the slight sign of disloyalty they would be apprehended by the Thought Police, striking fear into the people. People had no privacy due to the government and this can now be seen today. Referring to the NSA "The agency has circumvented or cracked much of the encryption, or digital scrambling, that guards global commerce and banking systems, protects sensitive data like trade secrets and medical records, and automatically secures the e-mails, Web searches, Internet chats and phone calls of Americans and others around the world"(Lopez np). Growing use of internet and technology makes it easier for the government to spy on us. Like in 1984 they will soon be able to track our every move. There is no way to completely remove ourselves from technology, there's are steps to take to protect privacy. A solution is to keep more records on paper instead of online. Also, what is posted on social networks should be limited. The less information you give them, the less the government knows.
How much privacy do we as the American people truly have? American Privacy is not directly guaranteed in any manner under the United States Constitution; however, by the Fourth Amendment, Americans are protected from illegal search and seizure. So then isn’t it ironic that in today’s modern world, nothing we do that it is in any way connected to the internet is guaranteed to remain discreet? A Google search, an email, a text message, or even a phone call are all at risk of being intercepted, traced, geo located, documented, and stored freely by the government under the guise of “protecting” the American people. Quite simply, the Government in order to protect us and our rights, is willing to make a hypocrite of itself and act as though our right is simply a privilege, and without any form of consent from the people, keep virtual tabs on each and every one of us. In the words of Former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis “The right to privacy is a person's right to be left alone by the government... the right most valued by civilized men." Privacy isn’t just Privilege, it is nonnegotiable right, and deserves to be treated as such.
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
Nowadays it’s hard to live a secret life. Every move we make is being watched. National security is the main reason why we are being surveyed. Our world has transformed to an internet revolution. We are engaged much in social media and internet more than ever. People are able to incite a revolution like the one in Egypt in recent years. The world we live in is much different to what it was twenty years ago. Internet changed the power of information exchange between us. Social media’s like Facebook and twitter connects the world tremendously. People exchange information in a matter of seconds. Therefore, the question becomes: Should our government go through our private emails and social media?
The government is doing the total opposite of this. In fact, the government is invading everyone 's privacy which means that they are intruding into the personal lives of US citizens without a reason to. This should give the person whose privacy has been invaded a right to sue the government for damages against the person or entity that has been intruded. Privacy is essential to giving a person the time to reflect on events that have transpired personally, religiously, and politically. It is as essential as sleep; it helps to provide the time to formulate opinions and decisions on all minor and major things in a person 's life.
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
Every citizen has a fundamental right to privacy. No citizen should have the government looking at his or her information without his or her permission. The amendments in the constitution should be enough to protect citizen’s privacy. The government should not have the right to collect people’s personal information.
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.
Privacy is a right granted to all American citizens in the Fourth Amendment which states “people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and lives against unreasonable search and seizures”. Although our founding fathers could have never predicted the technological advancements we have achieved today, it would be logical to assume that a person's internet and phone data would be considered their effects. This would then make actions such as secretive government surveillance illegal because the surveillance is done so without probable cause and would be considered unreasonable search or seizure. Therefore, access to a citizen’s private information should only be provided using probable cause with the knowledge and consent of those who are being investigated.
...onal privacy dead?” brings up many other questions along with it. But there is no doubt that the government is doing all of what they are doing for safety reasons. They claim to want to make the United States as safe as possible, and this has proved to ring true in many situations. But now the inevitable new question becomes: How far is too far? Is safety more important than privacy? To know these answers, one must ask themselves and know their own opinion on the situation. But whatever their answers may be, and despite the multiple other questions that are brought up along with the topic of personal privacy, there is still one thing that is known for sure: personal privacy is dead. And unless the use of technology becomes less critical to the United States, personal privacy will always be dead. The bigger the role technology has; the less personal privacy there is.
They believe this because the public considers it an invasion of privacy. Freedom has been an issue for centuries. Is it right for the government to know all of our private information? As technology has developed and become essential to our society, many government commissioners dread social media and its authority and power in our society – but does this give them the authority to monitor online content? This means that the government would have access to personal and confidential information that the public display on the internet.
I think there is a right to privacy. What privacy means is “the right to be left alone, or freedom from interference or intrusion” (IAPP,1). Every American citizen has the right to privacy whether it be privacy in their homes, the words in their emails, or daily activities. But not only do the American people have the right to privacy from other citizens, we also have the right to privacy from the government. If the government can keep their conversations, actions and secrets under lock and key then Americans can as well. But unfortunately, the Constitution does not explicitly say anything about “privacy” for the American people, it is left for open interpretation in multiple amendments. The main amendment that screams “privacy” is the fourth amendment.