Pros And Cons Of Government Surveillance

When it comes to government surveillance, there are many topics that are hotly debated over; if it’s constitutional or not, if the data and internet should be upheld to the same laws, and finally if probably cause is enough for the government to search U.S. citizens. Regardless of which side of the debate people are on, if these issues were to be addressed, a majority of American citizens would be pro-government surveillance. To understand the concept of government surveillance and the different opinion people may have when it comes to it, it is important to first look at the legality of it all. It is no question whether or not legal cases involving the internet and data are different than those with physical evidence. The closest example

Completely new jobs have been created due to internet alone such as cybersecurity and others. Even current jobs and networking or going over seas for work is made possible because of modern technology. These types of connects, jobs and possibilities were brand new to society at the time they were introduced and will continue to be constantly changing as America progresses as a society (schar.gmu.edu). Because of this, the laws surrounding the newer technology should be treated as such; new and different. Even in recent years there was talk about the government censoring certain parts of the internet which many argued was against freedom of speech and public knowledge. Even though “direct censorship of the internet is prohibited by the First Amendment with the exception of obscenity such as child pornography”, the individualized State governments attempt to regulate and censor certain parts of the internet despite the Federal decision of it being unconstitutional (Stanford.edu). At the current moment, the government is mass compiling information on it’s citizens for the reason of protecting America from terrorism. It does not need a warrant to search its citizens and to answer any questions of legality and whether or not the act is unconstitutional or not it states it only

Another argument on the side of the government is that collecting this information could prevent small crimes as well as national security. This ideal is also upheld to the same standard of probable cause and documentation is gathered in a similar manner. With all the information and data that could potentially be drawn from this widespread, yet secretive, government activity one can only wonder if all if it is actually being obtained legally (Stanford.edu). If the ideals of probably cause are applied to government surveillance, so should the law surrounding the legalities of apply for and obtaining a search warrant for other pieces of information where probable cause may not be sufficient enough to win a court case. Since one of the main discontent opinions about government surveillance and the legality of it seem to be there because of how may unknowns there are in exactly what is being drawn and from whom, the issues could be fixed if they were simply addressed. If the government could ensure the information was not just being gathered on all of American citizens regardless of reason, and was truly only being gathered legally, a majority of the citizens against surveillance would greatly