Patriot Act: A Short Summary And Analysis

Since the founding of the United States of America, freedom has been the basis of the governmental and ruling systems in place. Individual freedoms are protected in both the Bill of Rights and the rest of the Constitution, and Schwartz (2009) explains that ‘public liberty ultimately enhances collective rationality—it is a path to heightening our wisdom by increasing access to pertinent information and improving decision making’ (p. 409). However, there have been many times in history when the true freedom of citizens is called into question. There has always been controversy about how much power the government should have, who is keeping the government in check, and if citizens are properly informed about what their elected governed are doing. The passing of the Patriot Act in 2001 was no exception to this controversy. The

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 devastated the United States people. As they mourned over the deaths caused by the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York City, Americans began looking for a way to prevent anything like this from happening again. Consequently, an act known as the USA PATRIOT act was passed by Congress. This act opened up many doors previously closed to law enforcement and intelligence agencies. With these new opportunities available to them, they have the capability to obtain information about specific individuals believed to be involved in terrorist activities and organizations. Very beneficial to the United States, the Patriot Act provides easier access for different government law enforcement agencies to share information, allows government agencies investigative tools that non-terrorist crimes already use, and helps to dismantle the terrorist financial network. Although many people claim that the Patriot Act violates the United States Constitution and the freedoms of the American people, it contains many elaborate safeguards to fight against such abuse.

In the mist of America ending its wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan here in the homeland we are still be proactive in trying to alleviate terrorist threats and opportunities for terroristic activity in our backyards. When looking at the USA PATRIOT ACT that was enacted to help battle this ongoing pandemic it has come into question whether the laws of the USA PATRIOT ACT extremely broad, narrow, and overarching that they leave too much room for interpretation which in the end has led to violations of a person’s rights that they are guaranteed by the US Constitution.

After reading Chapter 3 in our book and reviewing the US Constitution from my Introduction to Government class I have come to the conclusion that the US Patriot act is a very controversial document. There are arguments both for and against the Document. However, I take the position against the document at this time.

The provisions of the Patriot Act sought to beef up security against homegrown terrorism increase surveillance procedures, including phone taps against an individual rather than just one phone number. Next, the act aimed at the removal of access to funding for terrorist groups and made it a requirement for financial institutions to prevent money laundering wherever possible. Title four was aimed specifically at providing more funding for protecting our borders. The most important part of title five was the use of National Security Letters and included an order which kept the target from knowing about it or even telling anyone else. Then, the act outlined compensation for victims of acts of terrorism and their families. Also, there was a sharp increase in information sharing between law enforcement entities and jurisdictions. Afterward, several criminal acts were added to the list of things considered acts of terrorism and the penalties increased for these acts as well. All of these things are, to me, a utilitarian effort to make our best moral effort to secure our country. Viewed from a consequentialist standpoint, things like the Patriot Act are

On September 11, 2001, the Unites States suffered massive destruction caused by terrorism. Four planes were hijacked by terrorist. Nearly, three thousand lives were lost when two planes crashed into the World Trade Towers, one crashed into the Pentagon, and the final plane crashed in Pennsylvania before it could reach its final destination. An immense fear spread across the country and out of this fear came the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct the Terrorism, also known as the USA Patriot Act.

A. Thesis: The Patriot Act is violating American’s right to privacy. Mainly, the right to hold a private phone conversation.

The Patriot Act allows the National Security Agency (NSA) to collect data, it can apply to the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence court to force businesses, such as cellular telephone companies, to provide user records, these records can be searched without the owners knowledge or consent. It can also obtain internet data from it the National Security Electronic Surveillance Program (PRISM), operated by the NSA, including emails, chats, photos, video, payment information including credit card numbers, and other digital information.

The laws of our country are very important to us and are what makes us unique from other nations. When something like the USA PATRIOT Act is passed, this law interferes with the privacy of citizens and contradicts our constitutional rights. The USA PATRIOT Act is one of the laws that has ignited a heated debate as many people criticize its abuse in implementation. The PATRIOT Act launched in 2001 as a reaction to the increased stress of terrorism attacks. The main purpose of the deed was to intercept the obstacles that made the process of detecting terrorist attacks difficult and slow. The Act gave the FBI the right to make urgent searches and arrests without having any arrest warrant or even a court order. This was to facilitate speedy action against suspects of terrorist acts. It is clear that the PATRIOT Act paved way for abuse of citizens’ rights of privacy and this was a full disregard for the constitution.

On October 26, 2001, President Bush signed into law the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, commonly known as the USA Patriot Act (Currier). The Patriot Act pertains to data that is being transferred that would be considered to be terrorist associated. This can include any date over the internet or in this case dealing with the private sector. I believe that certain aspects of a private sector company should be willing to give information to the government of suspicious terrorist actions. Better safe than sorry. For instance, if a person is depositing money into a bank that is of average amount and then all of a sudden deposits 10,000 dollars in cash, this

knowledge, or large cash transactions, and someone stealing or purchasing explosives. These are hints all of terrorist activity.

To some, the United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) act is a law essential to winning the War on Terrorism; for others, this act is viewed with utmost contempt for its Orwellian nature allowing Big Brother to read your email and look through your library records. The security versus liberty debate prevails with both sides citing legal and ethical reasons in support or in opposition to this controversial act.

In an age of what appears to be increasing insecurity, Americans have to make a choice between being secure and maintaining civil liberties, or leaving it up to the government to decide. The privacy of Americans should be taken into more consideration when using surveillance and other methods to watch the people. Privacy today faces growing threats from a developing surveillance apparatus that is repeatedly justified in the name of the national security. Security is privileged over values, such as civil liberties after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Due to this horrendous event, the national government commenced its surveillance attack in hopes of stopping another terrorist outbreak from happening, but it only created a divide within the American people. The government is trying to rebuild the security that was lost (“Money”). Their plan involves increasing the surveillance, listening to phone calls, and monitoring people’s searches for keywords, and using the law to their advantage. These measurements are exaggerated and unnecessary in order to protect Americans. The government divided the nation through this act. In order to restore the nation to its proper standing, the first step to fix the nation should have been the Patriot Act, which was put into place after 9/1l, but it is the Patriot Act that actually started the divide of the people and government.

Medine’s piece, Choice Between Security and Liberty a False One, focuses on the delicate balance between privacy and security. The central theme presented is about the methodology of information gathering. First off, Medine explains that a knee jerk reaction to tragic events, such as the attacks in Paris, shouldn’t be the catalyst to end or change existing surveillance programs. Following the Paris attacks, there were appeals requesting that the National Security Agency increase their phone records collection program known as Section 215.

Thesis Statement: “Citizens of this country should value the national security more than their privacy since it is concerned with a much larger group of people in order to protect our country from invaders, to maintain the survival of our country and to prevent airing of criticism of government.”