I. Introduction
Attention Getter: Listening in on a conversation you aren’t a part of is considered eavesdropping. When the government does it, the term is coined wiretapping. How can you feel secure in your own home knowing private information you speak or type is monitored, recorded and placed on file?
Thesis: Wiretapping is no different and it’s an invasion of our privacy as hard working citizens, it’s a violation of our 4th amendment.
Ethos: According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, wiretapping has been prevalent due to the government’s affiliation and support of several telecommunication companies
Value Step: Wiretapping is pertinent to all of us, because as US citizens, we are monitored every day. In this day and age, many people
…show more content…
Engage audience: That is a direct violation of your 4th amendment right. You’re essentially being searched via message and/or audio. Being searched without a warrant in any sense does violate your right.
b. Warrant: If the government wants to monitor our phone calls, messaging and internet service and uses, then why not publicly tell the people? Many people aren’t aware that they’re being watched behind closed doors, having their movements recorded due to smartphone technology, or know that their text messages and emails can be pulled up by another organization, if the situation(s) demanded it.
i. Transition: Granted, there are some US citizens that are ok with the NSA tapping into our files and personal communication wherever we are, it should be more known to the public that this occurs. I strongly believe the act of wiretapping should be a decision the individual makes, not a
…show more content…
Counter Claim: Now my opponent may argue that wiretapping can save lives.
i. Reasoning for counter claim: Because siphoning information can help with detrimental outcomes. ii. Rebuttal: However, giving up our basic right which is the foundation of our government is a high price to pay for being protected. Accepting wiretapping as a norm would infringe on our right to privacy. The reason that this government is so great is because of the freedoms that are provided to us. And by allowing wiretapping we would be giving up a significant human right. What else are we going to be asked to give up? we should look towards getting a law passed that permits people to choose whether or not they wish to be monitored by the NSA, and to have those people who refuse to be documented under their notice. iii. Backing: As written in the bill of rights, there are “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” If you choose to allow wiretapping within your personal space such as your home, and through your mobile devices, then so be it. If you are opposed to this, then a law should be passed allowing you to choose where you draw the line as to how you are
Acts of terrorism are vicious and pitiless, taking the lives of innocent individuals. I believe that in order to stop these acts of rebellion, unconventional means of combating the threats are necessary, one of these being, wiretapping. In the article, Counterpoint: War on Terror and Wiretaps, the authors explain the controversial issue regarding the government tapping our technology. Although the process may seem excessive and invading to some, it will help save the lives of American citizens. It seems only obvious that someone should care more about the safety of their loved ones, than their text messages being exposed to the government. In the book, Fahrenheit 451, written by Ray Bradbury, it discusses a society in which the government
Government Wiretapping is when the government gets access without court consent is used completely illegally Every day, Hundreds of millions of people chat exchange text messages and send picture through social sites like Facebook and you don't know whether or not the government is watching you and see everything you send out they are just invading your privacy. While it may help catch criminals (terrorist drug dealers etc) it is being used to spy on millions of people ILLEGALLY there have even been some cases of government officials choosing to spy on people they know even if they know they're innocent. Why should the government be allowed to wiretap without court consent? They are looking at innocent people's information and some cases have
Statement of Issue: Does wiretapping of private phone calls violate the third and Fourth Amendment right individuals.
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.
A. Thesis: The Patriot Act is violating American’s right to privacy. Mainly, the right to hold a private phone conversation.
When there is little privacy caused by the fourth amendment it should be looked at seriously. The 4th amendment allows law enforcement to use collect evidence from phone calls for using in court as evidence. Though they need permission from a judge to go through and use your calls they could use your conversations as evidence, as they can use it to catch terrorist and thieves. The intelligence agency can not only use phone calls, but they can also search your home and even your vehicle, obviously they need a warrant but there are a few cases where they do not need a warrant. An example of a case that they do not need a warrant is when a weapon or evidence that is needed is in plane sight, but anything not in plane sight you must have a warrant.
Whether it is calling someone on your phone or online shopping on the computer, people are more connected than ever to the internet. However, a person might be oblivious to the fact that they are being watched using these technologies. The NSA (National Security Agency) is an intelligence organization for the U.S. to protect information systems and foreign intelligence information. Recently the NSA has been accused of invading personal privacy through web encryption, tracking, and using personal information for their own uses and without permission. The surveillance of the NSA produces unlawful invasion of privacy causing an unsecure nation.
The NSA has been secretly ordered to eavesdrop by the Bush administration after the 9/11 terrorist attack. The base of where the NSA has been operating their wiretapping agenda is in Bluff Dale, Utah the building sprawls 1,500,000 square feet and possess the capacity to hold as much as five zeta bytes of data it has cost almost $2,000,000,000. The act of spying over the USA citizens even though they are suspicious is a threat to the people’s privacy and the privacy of other countries’ members are being infringed on by the NSA by the act of wiretapping. The action of wiretapping violates laws for privacy, like the Bill of Right’s Amendment Four which says “Every subject has a right to be secure from all unreasonable searches, and
As the late Frank Herbert once said, “Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.” Federal electronic wiretapping and supervision dates to the Wiretap Act of 1968, and has only increased in the following decades. Organizations such as the National Security Agency have been empowered by FISA (United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Courts) to bypass the authority of the Supreme Court in determining constitutional validity on searches. Government Surveillance is unjustified because it infringes upon personal freedoms, does not guarantee safety, and is not a vital necessity.
National Security Agency (NSA) regulations and tactics’ is an invasion of privacy, an infringement on the Constitutional Amendments, and fails to keep the private or confidential data of Americans safe from hackers.
During the past decade, an issue has arisen from the minds of people, on which is more important? Privacy or national security? The problem with the privacy is that people do not feel they have enough of it and national security is increasing causing the government to be less worried about the people. National security is growing out of control which has led to the decrease in people’s privacy and has created fear in the eyes of U.S. citizens. “Twelve years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and amid a summer of revelations about the extent of the surveillance state built up to prevent others, leaders, experts and average Americans alike are searching for the right balance between security and privacy” (Noble). Americans should be able to live their daily lives without fear of an overpowered government or a “big brother” figure taking over. “According to a CBS News poll released Tuesday evening, nearly 6 in 10 Americans said they disapproved of the federal government’s collecting phone records of ordinary Americans in order to reduce terrorism” (Gonchar). While it is good to keep our country safe with security, American’s privacy should be more important because there is a substantial amount of national security, the people 's rights should matter first.
Thesis statement: Government surveillance should be stopped because it is an invasion of privacy and gives the government control that is not enumerated in the constitution.
As a nation, we have had many first-hand experiences with terrorism and violence. The pain and suffering we are put through as a nation, people tend not to consider being subjected to government surveillance. Our security from future terrorist attacks is vital, then again, not as vital as our privacy. People shouldn’t be so quick to sacrifice their privacy rights, to allow the government to monitor national security. Giving the government the power of invading our privacy, creates an effortless way for them to violate their power and strip citizens of their constitutional rights. People will argue that the price one has to pay for safety, is giving up their rights to privacy. As Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” (Independence Hall Association). In other words, those willing to give up their privacy for security, deserve neither. We the people, those who assemble this nation, should not allow the government to invade our privacy or void our 4th amendment right.
Ever since the American public was made aware of the United States government’s surveillance policies, it has been a hotly debated issue across the nation. In 2013, it was revealed that the NSA had, for some time, been collecting data on American citizens, in terms of everything from their Internet history to their phone records. When the story broke, it was a huge talking point, not only across the country, but also throughout the world. The man who introduced Americans to this idea was Edward Snowden.
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.