Government Surveillance For The Greater Good With new advances in technology each day it’s becoming easier to communicate with each other. Talking to friends and family around the world has now become easier. Yet with all these new forms of communication there have been unpleasant side effects, since this new advanced technology is not only for harmless interaction it is also used to plot against governments and countries. Governments have found themselves under attack and have had to resort to monitoring their citizen’s online and phone activities. The thought that the government is watching them is often very off putting for many Americans. They feel as their right to privacy has been invaded and defiled. What they fail to see is that government surveillance prevents terrorists attack not only from the outside but also from the inside. It has brought to justice those that have launched or planned to launch an attack, and yes it has even has given americans a sense of security. To some government surveillance seems like a threat to their rights but it is only ensuring the security and safety of the nation. Government Surveillance was not designed to spy on american people’s lives as some would lead to believe. It was and still is intended to help prevent terrorists attacks thus protecting american citizens. The chief of the National Security Agency recently reported that the organization has “prevented 13 terrorists attacks in the U.S” (Kelly). While this may seem like a small number it is a crucial number, since only one terrorist attack could kill millions of innocent people. Yet to do this the NSA must be able to know what these terrorists are doing and who t... ... middle of paper ... ... The New York Times, 30 Apr. 2013. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. “Patriot Act”. Wikipedia. Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia, 13 Nov.2013.Web.15 Nov.2013. Perez, Evan. "In a First, U.S. to Use NSA Surveillance against Terror Suspect." CNN. Cable News Network, 26 Oct. 2013. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. "Primary Documents in American History." 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Primary Documents of American History (Virtual Programs & Services, Library of Congress). Library Congress, n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. Schorn, Daniel. "Terrorists Take Recruitment Efforts Online." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, 11 Feb. 2009. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. "U.S. Senate: Reference Home Constitution of the United States." U.S. Senate: Reference Home Constitution of the United States. United States Senate, 1994. Web. 18 Nov. 2013.
Adam Penenberg’s “The Surveillance Society” reminds Americans of the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and the instant effects the that attacks on the World Trade Center had on security in the United States. Penenberg discusses how the airports were shut down and federal officials began to plot a military response. Although those were necessary actions, they were not as long lasting as some of the other safety precautions that were taken. The Patriot Act, which makes it easier for the government to access cell phones and pagers and monitor email and web browsing, was proposed. Politicians agreed that during a war civil liberties are treated differently. From there, Penenberg explains that for years before September 11th, Americans were comfortable with cameras monitoring them doing everyday activities.
Is the American government trustworthy? Edward Joseph Snowden (2013) released to the United States press* selected information about the surveillance of ordinary citizens by the U.S.A.’s National Security Agency (N.S.A.), and its interconnection to phone and social media companies. The motion picture Citizenfour (2014), shows the original taping of those revelations. Snowden said that some people do nothing about this tracking because they have nothing to hide. He claims that this inverts the model of responsibility. He believes that everyone should encrypt Internet messages and abandon electronic media companies that track personal information and Internet behavior (op.cit, 2014). Snowden also stressed to Lawrence Lessig (2014) the importance of the press and the first amendment (Lessig – Snowden Interview Transcript, [16:28]). These dynamics illustrate Lessig’s (2006) constrain-enable pattern of powers that keep society in check (2006, Code: Version 2.0, p. 122). Consider Lessig’s (2006) question what is “the threat to liberty?” (2006, p. 120). Terrorism is a real threat (Weber, 2013). Surveillance by social media and websites, rather than the government, has the greater negative impact on its users.
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.
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.
This is the price you pay to live in free society right now. It 's just the way it is." (Mullins, Domestic Surveillance, 2015). And this is when this quote hit me emotionally, the people of the United states should not be put under this situation. It is like saying I have gun on you but I promise I will never pull the trigger, what prof do I have of the government not pulling the trigger. That’s not how you societies, living in the mania of terrorism should not stop the American people from having the basic right, living in fear should not take away the freedom speech. Even with all the unreal evidences, the other side of the camp still has no valid point to whether the domestic surveillance has ever
Whether the U.S. government should strongly keep monitoring U.S. citizens or not still is a long and fierce dispute. Recently, the debate became more brutal when technology, an indispensable tool for modern live, has been used by the law enforcement and national security officials to spy into American people’s domestic.
Throughout many years in the United States, there has been controversy over whether or not government surveillance and other technology is a violation of human rights. Ever since the publication of George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, there has been an increase in debates on the subject. The novel itself exemplifies what a surveillance-based society is like, providing the reader with a point of view of what could happen to their own society. Discussion over the usage of information that the government has gathered has become one of the foremost topics being analyzed to this day. The information that is being viewed by surveillance would otherwise be private, or information that people would not want to be leaked out. Therefore, surveillance executed by the government and companies has become an infringement to the right of privacy, and United States citizens should take actions upon it before the world reflects the Orwellian vision of the future.
The same surveillance state has become the new normal in America and is disturbingly recognizable today. Over six hundred state, local, and federal agencies conduct intelligence operations through Joint Terrorism Task Forces and Fusion Centers. In 2004, the ACLU discovered an FBI spying on political advocacy groups and found out that the FBI lied to hide these improper activities from Congress and the American public. The Senate report found the intelligence gathering at Fusion Centers was “flawed, irrelevant, unrelated to terrorism, and posed a serious threat to privacy (Rhode, 2017).” The Thought Police watch people in their public and private lives through the use of telescreens, microphones, and cameras and enforce loyalty and
The recent terrorists attacks of 9/11 has brought security to an all-time high, and more importantly brought the NSA to the limelight. Facts don 't change however, terrorist attacks are not common as history has shown. So what has domestic surveillance actually protected? There are no records to date that they have stopped any harm from being caused. If it is well known by every American that they are being watched, then why would a terrorist with the intention of harming use these devices to talk about their heinous acts? The real criminals are smarter than this, and it has shown with every attack in our history. Petty acts of crime are not what domestic surveillance should be used for. Terrorism has been happening for decades before any electronics were introduced, and even in third world countries where electronics are not accessible. The government needs a different way to locate these terrorists, rather than spy on every innocent human being. Andrew Bacevich states in his article The Cult of National Security: What Happened to Check and Balances? that until Americans set free the idea of national security, empowering presidents will continue to treat us improperly, causing a persistent risk to independence at home. Complete and total security will never happen as long as there is malicious intent in the mind of a criminal, and sacrificing freedoms for the false sense of safety should not be
One of the many details shown is that mass surveillance has not had an apparent impact on the prevention of terrorism (Greenwald, 2013). Most of the information gathered has not been used to impede a terrorist attack. Surveillance does not protect the rights to life, property and so on from being violated by terrorists. However it gives the citizen...
Today, in the United States, national security is a major issue. With countless terrorist attacks being inflicted on the U.S., government officials seek to fix the problem by any means possible. In 2001, shortly after the attack on September 11, the George W. Bush administration drafted legislation designed to prevent future terrorist attacks; however, controversy broke out concerning people’s rights to privacy. In effect, The Patriot Act was passed to support the public’s demand to combat terrorism in the wake of 9/11 and resulted in the expansion of the surveillance of federal law-enforcement, and controversy regarding the violation of basic constitutional rights.
Citizens feeling protected in their own nation is a crucial factor for the development and advancement of that nation. The United States’ government has been able to provide this service for a small tax and for the most part it is money well spent. Due to events leading up to the terrifying attacks on September 11, 2001 and following these attacks, the Unites States’ government has begun enacting certain laws and regulations that ensure the safety of its citizens. From the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 to the most recent National Security Agency scandal, the government has attempted and for the most part succeeded in keeping domestic safety under control. Making sure that the balance between obtaining enough intelligence to protect the safety of the nation and the preservation of basic human rights is not extremely skewed, Congress has set forth requisites in FISA which aim to balance the conflicting goals of privacy and security; but the timeline preceding this act has been anything but honorable for the United States government.
The American government used to be able to keep the people in happy ignorance to the fact that they watch every move they make. After certain revelations of people like Edward Snowden, the public knows the extent of the government spying. On June 5, 2013 Edward Snowden leaked documents of the NSA to the Guardian (The Guardian 2). The whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed to the world how the American government collects information like cell phone metadata, Internet history, emails, location from phones, and more. President Obama labeled the man a traitor because he showed the world the illegal acts the NSA performs on US citizens (Service of Snowden 1). The government breached the people’s security, and now the people are afraid because everyone is aware of how the US disapproves of people who do not agree with their programs. Obama said that these programs find information about terrorists living in the US, but he has lit...
Video cameras are being deployed around the nation to help with crime solving, but some people are concerned about their privacy. Having cameras to monitor public areas have shown to be useful in situations such as identifying the bombers of the Boston marathon in early 2013. There have also been issues with these cameras however, as people are concerned they are too invasive of their privacy and have been misused by police officers in the past. Some people want to find a balance in using cameras in public so that they can continue to help with crime solving while making sure they are not too invasive and are properly used.
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