We Negate Resolved: Mass Surveillance

Anrey Peng

September 28, 2014

Forensics Essay 2014

We negate Resolved: Mass surveillance is not a justified method of governmental intelligence gathering. Mass surveillance is a justified method of governmental intelligence gathering. An example of this is National Security Agency surveillance. National Security Agency Surveillance directly prevents terrorist plots from occurring. According to James Jay Carafano, a leading expert in national security, there have been 60 Islamic-inspired terrorist attacks on the United States since 9/11. Of these sixty, fifty-three were thwarted long before the public was ever in any danger, due in large part to combined efforts of United States law enforcement and intelligence provided by metadata collection

According to John Shiffman and Kristina Cook of Reuters, the Special Operations Division, a sector of the Drug Enforcement Administration which was made to receive tips from the National Security Agency and other intelligence agencies, conducted Project Synergy, a crackdown on drug manufacturers and wholesalers that spanned over 35 states and resulted in 225 arrests. The National Security Agency also helps in making the Drug Enforcement Agency a more efficient program. In fact, also according to John Shiffman and Kristina Cook of Reuters, current and former Drug Enforcement Agency agents stated that the Special Operations Division’s tips, which are provided in part by the National Security Agency, “have enabled them to catch drug smugglers that may have gotten away”. National Security Agency surveillance assists in the war on drugs, which prevents drug smugglers and drug lords from gaining power. Additionally, a reduction in the number of drug smugglers and producers doing business inside of the United States results in fewer people using drugs, and a reduction in the amount of people starting drugs, which results in less people dying from drug related

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