...Individual Privacy vs. National Security Anthony Sifuentes ENG 122 English Composition II Instructor vonFrohling February 13, 2012 Individual Privacy vs. National Security The need to protect National Security is far more important than individual privacy. The greatest part of living in the United States of America is the freedom that we have. That freedom and the right to live freely is protected by various government agencies. From time to time, the privacy a person has may have to be invaded to guarantee the security of the country and other citizens. Everyone has the right to not have their life controlled by the government, but it has the right to make sure that citizens are not doing anything to threaten the security of the country. Our freedom also comes at a price; that price is the need of the government to monitor some of the things we do so ensure that the United States is not in danger of a terrorist attack or an attempted overthrow of the government. The most glaring example of how National Security is more important than the privacy of an individual is September 11, 2001. The terrorist attacks that day have changed how Americans see our National Security and it must take precedence over anything else. One definition found for national security is: “The measures taken by the state to ensure the security of itself, or its citizens or subjects.” (Thomas, 2007) He goes on to explain that is both a right and a responsibility for a state to protect its citizens...
Words: 2496 - Pages: 10
...JoAnn McElwaine HIS 167 (26208) Essay #2 The United States government has seen security and preservation of the society as taking precedence over civil liberties. Some civil libertarians are concerned that not abiding by the Constitution will eventually lead the demise of civil liberties. Some even consider this worse than terrorism itself. Even though , as history proves, our government has underestimated our nations security. The United States is in much greater jeopardy from international terrorists that previously believed. We also have to be concerned about terrorists living on our own soil. In the wake of 911, the government signed a law in 2001 called the USA Patriot Act, citing the need for more participation on all levels of security. Law enforcement was given a wider preemptive authority and encouraged to share information. The law was passed with one goal in mind; a safer America. Over the years, some Americans have become concerned that law enforcement restrictions were too invasive, that wire tapings and extensive surveillance was too much of an invasion of civil liberties. Many argued that the Patriot Act affects all citizens personal freedoms and privacy. The government argues that only suspected terrorists are affected by the law. As arguments flare about the proper balance between civil liberties and national security, a recent survey of terror cases show that surveillance such as intercepted communications and the monitoring of e-mail...
Words: 426 - Pages: 2
...James Newberry Andrea Janovic Soc 111 21 April 2013 The Patriot Act Is Unconstitutional On September, 11, 2001, terrorist attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. They were probably going to attempt to fly a fourth plane into the White House. Most of us remember that day, where we were, and even what we were doing that morning; I know that I do. We all felt helpless and defenseless on that September day, and our overwhelming national response was to apprehend the people who had perpetrated this heinous act upon America. A week after the 9-11 attacks President Bush submitted a legislative proposal to combat terrorism called the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (Patriot Act). The Act passed in the Senate without debate. After minor changes were made in the House, the complex, 342-page bill passed 357 to 66 and was signed into law on October 26, 2001. This seemingly innocent law designed to protect Americans has had the opposite effect, eroding the civil liberties of U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens residing in the United States today. Shortly after 9/11 the government secretly arrested and jailed some 1,200 people in its investigation of September 11; they refused to divulge the number of arrests, the names of their lawyers, 0r even the reason for their arrests. Most of those arrested were Arabs...
Words: 1515 - Pages: 7
...in the United States and how the constitution should be challenged on this controversial topic. Discussions about citizens’ rights to bear arms extend back to ancient times. Supporters of gun control would like even tighter restrictions on the sale and circulation of firearms. According to Samuel Adams he argued that the Constitution should never be interpreted “to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” Several stated premises in the article were that “Opponents of gun control interpret the Second Amendment as the guarantee of a personal right to keep and bear arms.” In two other rulings, the Supreme Court reaffirmed this view in upholding New Jersey’s tough gun control law in 1969 (Burton v. Sills) and in supporting the federal ban on possession of firearms by felons in 1980 (Lewis v. United States). Gun control laws have several functions. They may be designed to hinder certain people from gaining access to any firearms. The laws may limit possession of certain types of weapons to the police and the military. A person who wants to make a gun purchase or obtain a gun license may be subject to a waiting period. Gun-control laws vary from country to country. The following stated premises are that gun violence also affects more than its victims. Opponents of gun control interpret the Second Amendment as the guarantee of a personal right to keep and bear arms. In the United States, the lack...
Words: 912 - Pages: 4
...However, it is a fact that as much as many people want to have full right to individual privacy, they will also be keen to ensure that their security is guaranteed. In other words, the two must be provided without necessarily causing collusion between the two. National security is prioritized compared to individual privacy given the fact that people universally value national security. Legal status of the Individual Privacy vs. National Security issue Controversies surrounding national security and individual privacy came at the limelight after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. However, this issue has been in existence for a longer time although it has had minimal effect on individual privacy. This paper will focus on recent events since little was heard in the past about the issue. The terrorist attack in 2001 is responsible for the heated debate of whether individual privacy should be given up for national security. The politics that followed the attacks prompted the legislatures to pass the United States of America Patriot Act (The Data Base Book, 2010). This was purposely done to give security agents a legal ground to search for and...
Words: 1286 - Pages: 6
...belief that if they could be free they could change the world for the better. We created more wealth, more art, more innovation, more technology than any other nation in history with our freedom. Our freedoms were protected by a document called the Constitution, a document that provided a very specific rules that the federal government could not violate. In recent years however the constitution has been being worked around, and most recently almost entirely ignored. We are in an out of control financial crisis., and out government is working as hard as it can to find ways to violate our basic fundamental freedoms so it can have more control. We are in so many countries with our army that it’s getting hard to count. We are becoming the very empire we fought so hard to escape. If only we would follow our constitution more closely, we wouldn’t be in this mess. The Constitution ensures that the government has a very limited and specific duty: To provide for the common defense of the nation as a whole, and to provide mechanisms to allow trade between the states, and to other countries. The state governments were given powers above that of the federal government, and they could control their states as they saw fit to. The constitution was meant to be a very strict set of rules to cripple the federal government so that a centralist tyranny could not emerge in our government. Most importantly it granted the people the protections of the bill of rights. These were 10 major rules that...
Words: 3788 - Pages: 16
...THE USA PATRIOT ACT--GOOD OR EVIL? Abstract Terrorism has been around in one form or another since long before September 11th 2001. It is our extreme reaction to the real threat of a terrorist attack began 9/11/2001. Although the odds of dying from a terrorist attack in America are extremely remote, after the attacks of 9/11/2001 and the overwhelming show of concern by American citizens, Congress hastily put together a bill outlining the workings of the U.S. Patriot Act. The United States Patriot Act of 2001 was signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2001. President Barack Obama signed the Patriot Sunsets Extension Act of 2011, which created a 4 year extension of 3 key parts of the Patriot Act. Warrantless searches of business records, roving wiretaps, & conducting surveillance of individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to any specific organized terrorist groups. The Patriot Act dramatically reduced restrictions on law enforcement agencies' ability to search all records, documents, histories, etc., without the restraints of the normal operations of judicial law which most citizens assume will always protect them. The National and State Governments and their agencies work together to implement the Patriot Act with as minimal an “obvious” intrusion as possible into ours, the American citizens lives. It is obvious the security must be there, but with a minimal amount of perceived disruption to constitutionally given freedoms and rights. US...
Words: 2455 - Pages: 10
...isolationist policy to seize some of America’s most valued markets including oil properties. The Patriots were furious and demanded that the US give up their noninterventionist ideals and actively participate in the war. But, Congress still refused to declare war because although misbehavior in Latin America angered the people and although ferocious dictators were rising in the Eastern Hemisphere, the US decided to maintain its isolationist policies that George Washington had proposed in his farewell address. In other words, the US decided to adopt the concept of Storm Cellar Diplomacy. Some frustrated folk like Senator Gerald Nye led a senator committee which sensationalized news items from World War I and put the blame on the United States economic instability. Even with so much pressure, the US was only more adamant and refused to enter the war. They even went as far as to establish Neutrality Acts which while claiming to remain neutral also hinted at the fact that if the President...
Words: 1926 - Pages: 8
...taxation without representation C. Initial skirmishes 1. Writs of assistance against smuggling 2. Proclamation of 1763 3. Sugar Act 4. Revenue Act 5. Currency Act D. Stamp Act crisis 1. Provisions of Stamp Act 2. Indignation in colonies 3. Taxation and representation; increasing opposition a. Virginia resolutions b. Stamp Act Congress c. Boycott of British goods d. Public demonstrations e. Committees of Correspondence f. Sons of Liberty g. Crowd actions 4. Breadth of opposition a. Colonial elites b. Middling ranks c. Laboring classes 5. Repeal of Stamp Act; passage of Declaratory Act E. Internal colonial disputes 1. Tenant uprising in Hudson Valley 2. Tenant uprising in Green Mountains 3. Regulators in South Carolina 4. Regulators in North Carolina II. The road to revolution A. Townshend crisis 1. Provisions of Townshend duties 2. Colonial response, home-spun virtue a. Revival of boycott on British goods b. American-made goods as symbol of resistance c. Reawakening of popular protest B. Boston Massacre 1. Stationing of troops in Boston 2. The massacre 3. Popular indignation C. An uneasy calm 1. Repeal of Townshend duties; withdrawal of troops from Boston 2. Lifting of boycott 3. Persisting suspicions of Britain 4. John Wilkes controversy 5. Anglican church rumors D. Tea and Intolerable Acts 1. Tea Act a. Roots in global commercial developments b. Contents 2. Colonial response a. Resistance in ports b. Boston Tea...
Words: 3043 - Pages: 13
...VICTIM RIGHTS, ADVOCACY, AND JUSTICE IN OUR POST-9/11 NATION Though there had been terrorist attacks in the United States prior to September 11, 2001, the events on that day in the skies above America, and in the cities of Washington, DC, New York, NY, and Shanksville, PA led to an unprecedented focus on the rights of victims and survivors, and historical expectations were placed upon our government as Americans looked to our leaders for protection, reparations, and justice. In some estimation, our government reacted swiftly, passing legislative measures that would reinforce the strength of the American economy. In other respects, individuals found it necessary to form private groups to advocate for measures and benefits that would not otherwise have become law without their fight. Certainly, in the realm of victim rights, advocacy, and the demand for justice, our post-9/11 nation has endured a dramatic metamorphosis. The September 11th Victim Compensation Fund was created by Congress through the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act (49 USC 40101), shortly after 9/11 to compensate victims (or their families) of the attack, should they agree not to sue. There was no such government compensation for other tragedies on American soil, such as the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City or the Katrina hurricane disaster. In this instance, the airlines asked Congress for help, and Congress decided that the airline industry “must remain...
Words: 3001 - Pages: 13
...but it seems to have reached to new levels in recent years. The debate over who has more authority in foreign policy issues has existed since the framing of the Constitution. I doubt the framers, however, could have imagined a world in which the President has almost unrivaled power in the realm of foreign policy. Ever since the United States became a world power following World War Two, the Executive Branch has increased in power and authority. Does the Executive Branch need more authority and flexibility when foreign policy is concerned though? When the United States is at war, we may need quick and decisive decisions that only the Executive Branch can give. When the military found Osama Bin Laden, President Obama did not wait to consult Congress. He and his advisors simply sent in the Seals and killed him. This is a good example of why so many believe the President needs more authority in times of war. Wars need a fast response when a situation arises and the country does not need Congress to endlessly debate about what to do; therefore, they have given the President more leeway in war powers over time. Congress did briefly give war powers back to themselves in the War Powers Act of 1973 during the crisis over the Vietnam War and Watergate. People such as former Senator John G. Tower, however, contest that “this act jeopardizes the President’s ability to respond quickly, forcefully, and if necessary in secret, to protect American interests abroad.”[1] I understand that secrecy...
Words: 1345 - Pages: 6
...Conjugal abuse Birth control Birth control; Contraception Birth control; Contraception Black Reparations Movement Reparations; Slavery--Law and legislation Reparations Body language Body language; Gesture; Nonverbal communication Nonverbal communication Bullying Bullying Bullying; Cyberbullying Business ethics Business ethics; Corporations - Corrupt practices Business ethics; Business enterprises, Corrupt practices Capital punishment (Death Penalty) Capital punishment; Death row Capital punishment Cancer Cancer--Prevention SEE ALSO types of cancer, such asBreast--Cancer Neoplasms--Prevention and Control;Cancer Treatment Censorship SEE ALSO Freedom of the Press Censorship; Prohibited books Censorship; USA Patriot Act 2001-US AND Civil liberties; Filtering software;Banned books Child abuse SEE ALSO Domestic violence Abused children; Child abuse Child abuse Child custody/support Custody of children Child custody Children of alcoholics Children of alcoholics; Alcoholics--Family relationships Children of alcoholics Cloning...
Words: 1762 - Pages: 8
...people feel that school prayer should be brought back into schools and practiced as part of the education process. The Supreme Court has continually denied allowing prayer to seep into the public school systems. Through years of controversy, many states started to adopt the “moment of silence” which was an attempt to bring back prayer in our schools. However, the school officials cannot suggest or have the kids pray, even though its true aim is clear, to encourage students to pray. Because of the “moment of silence,” there has finally been a neutral act to encourage prayer. There is a one sided claim that a mandated moment of silence in public classrooms amounts to an unconstitutional attempt to establish religion. The “moment of silence” is Constitutional, and a great way to encourage prayer for our students. Rufus Goodwin stated, “Praying, like poetry, is an activity that activates the human being.” In other words, prayer is a personal experience and intimate connection with our Father. People pray for several reasons such as personal benefit or for the sake of others. Prayers can consist of requesting guidance and assistance, confessing sins, or to express one’s thoughts and emotions (Goodwin R.). Why wouldn’t this intimate act with our Creator be an important part of the student’s day? Moments of silence often last one minute, but other amounts of time may be chosen. Sometimes people choose the length of a moment of silence to connect with an event being honored, such...
Words: 1621 - Pages: 7
...Introduction This assignment comprises of two articles, which deal with International Terrorism How not to fight Terrorism by Mukul Sharma and Exporting the Patriot Act? Democracy and the ‘war on terror’ in the Third World by Beth Elise Whitaker and a report named The Terror of Law UAPA and the Myth of National Security, by CDRO, which deals with terrorism on National level. The basic definition of terrorism is ‘the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purpose.’ An act of terrorism might be terrorism to one country whereas patriotism to another country. There are different definitions of terrorism by different agencies. There is no accurate definition of Terrorism as there is difference of opinion...
Words: 1689 - Pages: 7
...History of the United States I AMH 1010 CRN 10800, December 1, 2014 Wood, Gordon. The Radicalism of the American Revolution. Vintage Books, a Division of Random House, Inc., New York, 1991 Gordon Wood describes the American Revolution as a journey from paternal colonialism to an egalitarian democracy. His contention is that the American Revolution does not seem to have the same kinds of causes that Revolutions usually display. There were no big social wrongs, no class conflict, no severe poverty, or gross inequitable distribution of wealth. Wood claims our revolution was not about independence as most history books claim but about the radical transformation of the American society. Monarchy In this section the author describes the structure of colonial America in the 1750s and 1760s. In colonial society, authority and liberty flowed from the structure of personal relationships. Society was held together by networks of personal loyalties, obligations and dependencies. In this hierarchical society, the elite or aristocrats ruled. The aristocrats (also called gentlemen) used their wealth and their hereditary advantages to keep the common people as dependents. The aristocrats lived a life of leisure which meant that they were not expected to labor. Their income was supposed to come from their landed estates. They used these landed estates to control the issuance of government offices and created laws that would keep their estates in the family. Most estates were passed on to...
Words: 2135 - Pages: 9
