General Purpose: To persuade the audience to take a side on the Patriot Act
Specific Purpose: To display why the Patriot Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) is unconstitutional and not something the citizens should allow to be part of the US Law.
I. Attention Getter: Between 2003 and 2006, the FBI issued 192,499 National Security Letters which led to 1 terror-related conviction. This fact comes from
“A Review of the FBI’s Use of National Security Letters” by the Office of the Inspector General.
II. Thesis Statement/Argument: The Patriot Act is an unconstitutional act that violates basic rights found in the Constitution by limiting the freedom of speech, imposing
…show more content…
Limiting Freedom of Speech
Support: When contacted by FBI with a NSL( National Security Letter) and asked for information, you are then placed under a gag order. This means that you are forbidden from telling anyone that the FBI has approached you and asked for this information on a person.
Example: An email provider is contacted by the government to hand over emails from someone they are looking into, they are not allowed to release to the public this has occurred.
Support: The investigators have the ability to monitor any political or religious group without necessary cause.
Support: This can cause people to be afraid to speak up, or speak out against something, because anything no matter how private can be found.
Main Point II. Improper Search and Seizure
Support: Investigators may search houses, offices, papers, files, etc and seize any information found without probable cause. (Because of the NSL)
Example: “According to an analysis by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), out of the 11,129 reported uses of the Sneak and Peek Warrant tactic in 2013, only 51 cases (.5 percent) involved suspected terrorism. The overwhelming majority (9,401 cases) were used for narcotics investigations.”
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.
This report from the investigation by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) concerned allegations of wrongdoing and improper practices within certain sections of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Laboratory. Those allegations involved some of the most significant prosecutions in the recent history of the Department of Justice, including the World Trade Center bombing, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the mail bomb assassination of U.S. Circuit Judge Robert Vance (which was referred to within the FBI as the VANPAC case). The allegations implicated fundamental aspects of law enforcement: the reliability of the procedures employed by the FBI Laboratory to analyze evidence, the integrity of the persons engaging in
After the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11th, 2001 the United States became a very different place. This drastic change was caused by the initial emotional reactions that American citizens, as well as government leaders had towards the tragic event. The government, in an effort to assure that these events never happen again passed the USA PATRIOT Act, which is an acronym that stands for the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act. The major goal of this act is to combat terrorism by giving the government more leeway in what areas they are allowed to use their surveillance tools and also to what circumstances these tools can be used. The major issue that arise with this act are the fact that many of the act can be seen as unconstitutional.
One of the most popular cases of this argument to discuss is the issue of the Patriot Act. It was hastily passed following 9/11 and gave the federal government a license to restrict privacy in
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
In this paper I will discuss and explain the patriot act. I will also explain and discuss the provisions of the Act and the rationale behind each major component. Finally I will give my thoughts and views on the Patriot Act and talk about if I think this act is necessary to keep the United States safe and limit terrorist attacks.
A. Thesis: The Patriot Act is violating American’s right to privacy. Mainly, the right to hold a private phone conversation.
However, in such cases the U.S. Government is authorized to take reasonable actions to identify such communication or data as being subject to a privilege or confidentiality, and such actions do not negate any applicable privilege or confidentiality.
(6) Any investigative or law enforcement officer, or attorney for the Government, who by any means authorized by this chapter, has obtained knowledge of the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, or evidence derived there from, may disclose such contents to any other Federal Law Enforcement , intelligence, protective, immigration, national defense, or national security official to the extent that such contents include foreign intelligence information, to assist the official who is to receive that information in the performance of his duties.? This allows for a better sharing of information among the different division of federal, state and local law enforcement nationwide. In a large scale criminal investigation, proper communication and information sharing is vital. This act has allowed information to be disseminated to law enforcement agencies throughout the country, so they can effectively work together towards the goal of arresting terrorists, and preventing another terrorist attack. Another section of the USA PATRIOT ACT that Schmalleger (2003) quotes is Sec. 213. Authority for Delaying notice of the Execution of a Warrant. ?With respect to the issuance of any warrant or court order under this section, or any other rule of law, to search for and seize any property or material that constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States, any notice required,
The basis of the USA Patriot Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept
In addition, the freedom to information by government authorities must not exceedingly surpass the rights and privileges that citizens enjoy (Re and Richard, pg. 1887).
Other provisions included giving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) the ability to share information, access wiretaps referred to “roving wiretaps” that would cover all of technology a suspect may own, access to records including banking, books, or any “any other items sought in connection with a terror investigation,” lowers the requirements to obtain a “wiretap or search order”, allows delayed notice to those whose home or office has been searched under the “sneak and peek” warrants and has “outlawed material support” to organizations considered terrorist groups (Abramson & Godoy, 2006, pp. 2-4).
In the years since the passing of the Patriot Act, there has been much controversy and debate regarding the positive and negative advantages, and consequences of this bill. As a member of the law enforcement community I have experienced firsthand some of the changes the Patriot Act has brought upon this nation. A result of this experience along with information obtained in the studying of this act and
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.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 impacted the American people without many of them realizing it. The act called for increased monitoring of computer networks, phone lines, and online history inside the United States and allowed the government to deport suspects (ACLU). What was created by the act has snaked its way into all aspects of our lives, creating a sense of order and restricting some freedom. However, some say that this imposition into our daily lives limits our freedoms and actions allowed us by the Constitution. Many interest groups voice strong resentment for the act while others try to demonstrate the strengths and triumphs of the Homeland Security Act. This paper will show the differing viewpoints of those that feel that the