The Purpose Of National Security

The Patriot Act, an act passed by Congress in 2001 that addressed the topic of privacy in terrorist or radical situations, is controversial in today's society. Although it helps with protection against terroristic events, The Patriot Act is not fair, nor is it constitutional, because it allows the government to intrude on citizens' privacy, it gives governmental individuals too much power, and because the act is invasive to the 4th amendment right. To further describe key points in the act, it states that it allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking, and it allows law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred.

Although not every aspect of The USA PATRIOT ACT is radical, section 215 in The USA PATRIOT Act is one of the more critically addressed problems of this already controversial piece of legislation. Probably because most sane individuals would not like the government walking into a library or book store and ask for a list of anyone who purchased a book that may or not be considered radical enough to be flagged as possible terrorist activity. Summarized best by Dahlia Lithwick, “Section 215 modifies the rules on records searches. Post-Patriot Act, third-party holders of your financial, library, travel, video rental, phone, medical, church, synagogue, and mosque records can be searched without your knowledge or consent, providing the government says it's trying to protect against terrorism.” (Lithwick part 1) This raises concern that the government may cry wolf (terrorism) to circumvent the Bill of Rights for any investigation it so desired. John Ashcroft, as quoted by an unnamed CNN writer, said "If we ever make an inquiry about any kind of record or business record, it has the judicial supervision, so that a federal judge would look carefully and simply not allow it if it were not a part of a case that merited the involvement of the authorities." (CNN 1) It would seem that the term privacy never evolved alongside technology, allowing even greater

President Bush intended through legislation, to aid federal agencies in identifying potential terrorists and to ultimately protect this country from possible potential terrorist attacks in the future (Banks, 2010). Both individuals in power and ordinary citizens were greatly supportive of giving up certain liberties and privacy in order for the protection of the greater good. However, The Patriot Act was extremely controversial and advocates feared that power could be abused and that non-threatening citizens were being examined for crimes in which were not terrorist related (Sievert, 2007). Additionally, the most controversial aspect of The Patriot Act was the fear of privacy in relation to the first and fourth amendment (Xhelili and Crowne,

Moreover, the Patriot Act promotes information sharing among federal, state, and local agencies so that the process of information can be easier, which will hep increase the quality of intelligence products (Department of Justice, n.d.). The Patriot Act also allows federal agents to have a more active role in investigating cybercrimes that are usually carried out by terrorists and it also requires financial institution to report to federal authorities suspicious transactions that could be linked with money laundering as well as money counterfeit crimes (ACLU, 2017) (Congressional Digest, 2004). Although the Patriot Act helps reduce the risk of terrorist attacks and other crimes, it does have an impact on the privacy of law abiding citizens that have nothing to do with terrorism. For example, under the Patriot Act federal agents can easily

Technology has become very effective for a thriving generation, but it also possesses a handful of flaws that counter the benefits. Technologies help people post and deliver a message in a matter of seconds in order to get a message spread quickly. It also gives individuals the power to be the person they want to be by only showing one side of themselves. But sometimes information that had intentions of remaining protected gets out. That information is now open for all human eyes to see. This information, quite frankly, becomes everybody’s information and can be bought and sold without the individual being aware of it at all. However, this is no accident. Americans in the post 9/11 era have grown accustomed to being monitored. Government entities such as the NSA and laws such as the Patriot Act have received power to do so in order to protect security of Americans. However, the founding fathers wrote the fourth amendment to protect against violations of individual’s privacy without reason. In a rapidly growing technological world, civil liberties are increasingly being violated by privacy wiretapping from government entities such as the NSA, Patriot Act and the reduction of the Fourth Amendment.

As our fears grew concerning national security, our government began to conduct surveillance with certain groups labeled as “suspicious”. As this escalated into dangerous territory, it begged the question: does the threat of terrorism outweigh the right of privacy?

Congress ushered in the Patriot Act by arming law enforcement with new tools to detect and prevent terrorism by expanding federal officials’ powers to keep tabs on our personal information, from credit card use to cell phone calls to car travel. It allows investigators to use the tools that were

Americans in that time were worried about being attack again. Soon, President George W. Bush signed the patriot Act and U.S. Congress passed it on October 26, 2001. The act increases the ability of law enforcement agencies to listen on everybody’s phone calls, read their emails or instant messaging, and search the private records. The way it allows the rights of any suspected terrorist to be taken away without probable causes of criminal. The Patriot Act lacked effectiveness, moreover, it took away human’s right and most importantly it violates human’s privacy.

By wiretapping specific people, the government is making it harder for terrorists to communicate and share their plans over long distances without revealing their plan. In addition to wiretapping, the power to access old records of people also gives more control to the national government of peoples' future intentions: "The USA Patriot Act allows for government access to Database Search Records, Circulation Records, Computer Use Records, E-mail Records, Inter-Library, Loan Records, and Reference Interviews" (Johnson 1). These key provisions are what the United States needs to ensure the well-being of its people.

In the year of 2017, it is hard to find any person whose life does not revolve around their electronic devices. The Internet has changed the way people function, and become a crucial resource in schools, workplaces, and homes all over the world. There are people who feel they could not survive a day without it, and, of course, there are people who are wary of its dangers. Children are taught from a young age to tread carefully when using the Internet, and teenagers can recite lectures they have received from their parents time and time again: “Don’t talk to strangers,” “Be careful what you download,” and most importantly, “Never share your personal information online.” What most of these parents do not know, however, is that you do not have to share your personal information for it to be collected. Not only is your information collected without your consent—it can legally be used against you. Many statutes involving Internet surveillance were rudimentary and non-invasive at their creation, but on October 26th, 2001, everything changed. The Patriot Act was signed into law, just forty-five days after the horrifying terrorist attack on the Twin Towers. The USA PATRIOT Act, more commonly known as the Patriot Act, was not a single piece of legislature, but a package of amendments to preexisting laws. The most notable changes in the Patriot Act are the amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1968 (ECPA),

The Patriot Act was signed into law on October 26, 2001 by President George W. Bush. The act expanded the surveillance capability of both domestic law enforcement and international intelligence agencies. When this law was passed it was under the assumption “to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes” (The USA Patriot). The Patriot Act has given the government the power to spy on the average American through monitoring phone records and calls, gaining banking and credit information, and even track a person’s internet activity. This is an unbelievable amount of power intelligence agencies wield all under the umbrella of national security. This power has gone too far, is unjustified, unconstitutional, and infringes on the privacy of the

The United States of America is undoubtedly one of the world’s largest and most powerful nations. However, it has been facing the problem of terrorism for many decades, most notably after the tragic events of September 11th. The Patriot Act was passed shortly after these events in response to the acts of terrorism witnessed by the whole nation. At the time, it seemed rational and logical to allow this bill to pass, due to the extreme anger of American citizens, and the willingness to fight against terrorism. However, certain breaches of privacy came with the introduction of the Patriot Act. We as Americans want to feel protected from the threats of terrorism, however, we are not willing to give up certain privacies and liberties in order for that to happen, even when put to a vote.

Ever since the cloudy day on September 11, 2001, when two planes crashed into the twin towers, the United States government has been cracking down on security. The Patriot Act, passed October 26, 2001, was an effort by the United States government to ‘crack down’ on terrorism. The act removed several legal barriers that blocked or restricted law enforcement, intelligence, and defense agencies from storing data about possible terrorist threats and collaborating together to respond to them. The Patriot Act was supposed to make United States citizens feel more secure but in reality it had the opposite effect. Around 2013, when confidential NSA documents were leaked it was found that several government agencies had used the guise of the Patriot Act to monitor millions of United States citizens. In fact, it was found out by several civil liberties groups that the Patriot Act applies to more than just terrorist acts. For example, Title II of the Patriot Act allows government agencies to tap telephone lines and permits the interception of messages that may be relevant to a criminal investigation. Further, the act allows authorities to provide access to any tangible thing(books, records, papers, etc). Today, March 2, 2016, fifteen years after the government was given permission to spy on most of its citizens, the government is trying to spy on all Apple iPhones through the use of a code cracking software.

Government surveillance in the past was not a big threat due to the limitations on technology; however, in the current day, it has become an immense power for the government. Taylor, author of a book on Electronic Surveillance supports, "A generation ago, when records were tucked away on paper in manila folders, there was some assurance that such information wouldn 't be spread everywhere. Now, however, our life stories are available at the push of a button" (Taylor 111). With more and more Americans logging into social media cites and using text-messaging devices, the more providers of metadata the government has. In her journal “The Virtuous Spy: Privacy as an Ethical Limit”, Anita L. Allen, an expert on privacy law, writes, “Contemporary technologies of data collection make secret, privacy invading surveillance easy and nearly irresistible. For every technology of confidential personal communication…there are one or more counter-technologies of eavesdropping” (Allen 1). Being in the middle of the Digital Age, we have to be much more careful of the kinds of information we put in our digital devices.

The attacks on American soil that solemn day of September 11, 2001, ignited a quarrel that the grade of singular privacy, need not be given away in the hunt of grander security. The security measures in place were planned to protect our democracy and its liberties yet, they are merely eroding the very existence with the start of a socialistic paradigm. Benjamin Franklin (1759), warned more than two centuries ago: “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Implementing security measures comes at a cost both economically and socially. Government bureaucrats can and will utilize information for personal political objectives. The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator