Arguments Against The Government's Invasion Of Privacy

Is anyone’s private information contained in their cell phone actually private? Are appointments, bank information, conversations, the user’s location or other sensitive personal information truly confidential? Is there a Big Brother watching? There is no definitive answer to any of these questions. From the beginning of time to now, privacy has become more and more scarce. Through new developments in technology, it is hard to believe that someone is not watching your move at any given moment. The government’s job is to keep Americans safe, but where is the line drawn? Where is the difference between having a reasonable doubt and accessing information solely because these government officials have the power to do so? The government has infringed upon the rights of the American people when it comes to this topic.

Most Americans feel trapped by the government. They believe that the government is spying on them just to do so and that there is absolutely no reason for it. However this is wrong because the government has several reasons to spy on us Americans. Even though this may seem outrageous, it is needed and there are ways the United States’ citizens have privacy. With all of these false accusations it is simple to see why people would be supportive of our right to privacy. On the other hand, the government eavesdropping on the people of the United States has helped save many lives and justice being served. The United States of America is a free country, so we should have the option to be spied on by the government; however, as citizens we do

Privacy is, and should continue to be, a fundamental dimension of living in a free, democratic society. Laws protect “government, credit, communications, education, bank, cable, video, motor vehicle, health, telecommunications, children’s and financial information; generally carve out exceptions for disclosure of personal information; and authorize the use of warrants, subpoenas, and court orders to obtain the information.” (Protecting Individual Privacy in the Struggle Against Terrorists: A Framework for Program Assessment, 2008) This is where a lot of people feel as though they have their privacy violated. Most Americans are law-abiding citizens who do not commit illegal acts against the country, they want to go about their lives, minding their own business and not having to worry about outside interference. The fine line between privacy and National Security may not be so fine in everyone’s mind. While it is the job of government agencies to ensure the overall safety of the country and those living in it, the citizens that obey the law and do not do anything illegal often wonder why they are subject to any kind of search, when they can clearly point out, through documentation, that they have never done anything wrong.

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.

In today's society, you are always being watched. The USA PATRIOT Act wants it to stay that way. According to Chris Plante in, "A Short, Crucial Explanation of the USA PATRIOT Act and USA Freedom Act," the USA PATRIOT Act, or the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, creates an, "[...] expansion of government power pertaining to domestic surveillance, law enforcement, and border security." (The Verge). The USA PATRIOT Act allows increased spying on citizens in the United States in order to decrease crime and terrorism. The Patriot Act Poll Results via ISideWith tell a story of a lack of understanding about the USA PATRIOT Act, however, with approximately 55% of Americans supporting the act. However, despite the belief it is a well-regulated, necessary act, the USA PATRIOT Act must be repealed due to the abuses the act allows, the violations of citizens' rights, and the inefficiency of the act in preventing crime and terrorism.

With the seemingly exponential propagation of inexpensive digital communications technologies over recent years, the general public is becoming more aware of the issues surrounding information privacy and government surveillance in the digital age. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a smart-phone has to be wary of how they use their private information for fear of that information being collected and used in a way contrary to their wishes. "Leaky" smartphone apps that transmit private information across the internet can be unethically used by government agencies. The issue of privacy is a balancing act; the public usually wants increased privacy and the government usually wants increased access.

The controversy on government surveillance is very controversial. Should the government have unlimited access to citizen’s personal information, conversations, and text in order to protect the country? Or should the government have more of a laissez-faire-type role in citizen’s private lifestyles? Across the world, there are different approaches on the government’s surveillance on people. Iceland’s policies are the least intrusive in the world, with almost no surveillance and laws protecting the people’s freedom of speech. On the other end of the spectrum is China, which is in the process of creating a constant surveillance system of all its citizens. Somewhere in the middle of this scale is the United States of America. Influences by other

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.

Government surveillance has not contributed to a decrease of percentage in crimes, but has created a controversial topic instead. Online surveillance has been an invasion of privacy, because everything the users access is seen without their consent. Due to the fact the stored data is not used, government surveillance in the united states has not been very impactful. Crimes and terrorist attacks were not stopped, and the mass storage of personal data within the last year has violated privacy laws 2,776 times (Government Surveillance 722). Surveillance online is not only unsuccessful in America, but in UK, and Canada as well. Out of every 1000 security cameras, only one camera is actually used to catch a criminal (Government Surveillance 722). However, there are several solutions that can be made to allow the usage of government surveillance without the violating the rights of Americans. Some of the solutions have already taken action, and will give users more freedom online.

Indeed you’ll never be aware of all the things those agencies are doing to stop your identity being stolen and stop a terrorist blowing you up (Watts).” First of all, ask yourself the following: would you be willing to give a journalist the passwords to all of your social media accounts allowing them to scroll through all of your online activities and publish whatever they find interesting? Greenwald has asked this question to every person that has said a version of the saying but no one has ever replied to him (“Why Privacy Matters.”). The reality is that even those that disclaim the importance of privacy, instinctively understand and value it. The ability to be “free of the judgmental eyes of other people” is just as important as having liberty because everyone has something to hide, even the government officials managing the surveillance (“Why Privacy Matters.”). Furthermore, some individuals require privacy

The first paragraph of this article is the core argument and talking point for the rest of the paper. “When the government gathers or analyzes personal information, many people say they're not worried. “I’ve got nothing to hide," they declare. "Only if you're doing something wrong should you worry, and then you don't deserve to keep it private." In the most extreme version of the “nothing to hide” argument the author of the paper Prof. Daniel Solove's adds some responses to counter it:

In the years of government surveillance has improved in many ways such as the technology and advancing the fundamental ideals of individuals rights, they use the technology to avoid many terrorist attack. The government preferably and advancing the fundamental ideals of individual rights, they use technology to avoid a numerous of restrictions on surveillance on common civilians. Between the citizens of this country, there is a rising concern for the issue of privacy due to such a powerful creation, in this case the Utah Date Center, as they feel that they are feeling a severe violation on the rights that they had previously considered impenetrable. In order to stop these concerns, Congress should consider endorsing a law that seeks to join the government’s use of technology to our Constitutional values.

Americans have the right to know what personal information of theirs is being monitored by the government and if the government is operating in a constitutional manner. Although the top priority of government should be to protect Americans from international threats, it must do so without infringing on basic human rights. I believe that the Supreme Court rulings and laws regarding privacy are a good balance of protection and respect to privacy. However, government agencies such as the NSA have certainly overstepped their ground in many cases and abused clauses within the

First of all, it is important to know the definition of privacy, it is the right to control who knows what about you, and under what conditions. The right to share different things with the people that you want and the right to know that your personal email, medical records and bank details are safe and secure. Privacy is essential to human dignity and autonomy in all societies. If someone has committed a physical intrusion, or, in discussing the principal question, has published embarrassing or inaccurate personal material or photographs of the individual taken without consent, he is invading their right of privacy, which is in the article eight of the European Convention on Human Rights.

"The Constitution was written in very general language, which has resulted in ambiguity about where national power and authority end and state power and authority begin" (Fine, 2016). In other words, American Federalism, a system of government where people distribute power between national and state governments. The constitution gives each government their own power, but they also share some power and responsibilities. All people living in the United States have the right to privacy. The privacy of American citizens was a Supreme Court decision, which over the years has established that the right to privacy is a basic human right. The right to privacy is often protected by certain laws. For example, the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act that protects the health information of individuals, The Privacy of Children on the Internet, The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, the Federal Trade Commission that enforces the right to privacy in several ways and many other laws that help citizens maintain their rights to privacy. These are some of the national and state policy that would help me explain the advantages and disadvantages of the privacy laws.