Personal Security Research Paper

All three branches of the government on down to state and local governments, take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States; as well as federal employees, our military, and law enforcement officials. In an oath, you must adhere to that you are taking an oath to at all times ("Oaths of Office | Two Thirds of Us," n.d.). These oaths state more than upholding the Constitution, but they are too long to list each one here. The importance of mentioning these oaths is because many times, especially recently, these oaths have been broken and some have acted unconstitutionally; including our current President of the United States by using totalitarian-like abuse of power and bypassing congress with his executive actions (Judicial Watch, n.d.). Supreme Court Justices have also made unconstitutional rulings, but that is a matter to be discussed at a later time. The point is both our freedom and security are threatened by unconstitutional actions whether it be by a branch of government, a government official, or anyone who has taken such an oath a responsible for taking part in protecting our freedom and

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

“How much freedom are Americans willing to give up for safety from terrorists?” We the people of the United States are willing to give away our natural born rights to be a safer nation. Millions of innocent lives were lost on 9-11-01. A problem not widely discussed in the United States much until September 11, 2001 the date of the attack from terrorist organizations on the world trade centers’ New York towers in New York City. The United States of America has not worried much about self-defense or in this case homeland security. Due to the actions on September 11th homeland security has been the main goal of many politicians and voters. Homeland security builds coalitions and partnerships, protects civil rights and civil liberties, and

     On September 24, 2010, a laptop was stolen from an unlocked Urology office at the Henry Ford Health Systems hospital. The laptop did contain password protection software; however, it may not have been enough to permit access if the thief had advanced knowledge in computers. Additionally, the information stored on the laptop did not include social security or health insurance information, but instead held “patient names, medical record numbers, dates of birth, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, and treatment and doctor visits” (Moscaritolo, 2010, p. 1). It is unknown how many records were contained on the laptop, but all records were related to prostate services that were provided during an eleven year span.

Are you familiar with the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution? The Founders of our American government created the Bill of Rights to protect our individual liberties. They greatly believed in the significance of the overall creation of these particular rights, which happens to be the basic freedoms of us Americans. However, our government has compromised on these distinct liberties in the name of security and general welfare in various ways.

One of the safeguards in the U.S Constitution includes Federalist 10. Federalist 10 states that people will be protected by the government. This means the government can’t do wrong by the people, this is because the government is here to help its people. If the government one day decides to stop protecting its citizens, things won’t look so good on their side. (They will

The government often cites security as a justification for their actions, but Benjamin Franklin noted that those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither. I'd rather sacrifice some security than live in an Orwellian state. In Orwell's1984, people had

Let us look at rights that are supposedly preventing us from being secure. The 4th amendment gives “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” This in essence protects us from the threat of constant searches.Probable cause is strict. Our founding fathers thought it was important that the person you intend to search probably is doing something wrong even if we are afraid of them. The argument against this is

A man that goes by the name of “Paul Ryan” once stated, “We believe, as our founders did, that ‘the pursuit of happiness’ depends upon individual liberty; and individual liberty requires limited government’”. In fact, at the Constitutional Convention, in order to protect against giving the central government too much power, the delegates added the Bill of Rights to the Constitution in which these individual liberties are as stated in it . The Bill of Rights are the first ten amendments of the United States Constitution that guarantees legal and civil rights of the citizens. The Founders had high hopes of these individual liberties that were promised to the people. However, the government, which was supposed to have a limited power or say in this, has been attempting to compromise these liberties with sugar coated words such as they are doing this in the name of security or general welfare for the people by taking advantage of our desire for security.

The government of the United States takes the security of its Citizens very serious and this explains why security of USA Citizens home and abroad is their first line of duty. In the wake of 9/11 terrorism attack, the citizens were left questioning whether indeed the government was doing enough to protect them. On the same note, the Bush administration was shaken to the core that terrorist could advance that much into their soil. This formed the basis of various legislations and formation of special units with special powers to fight terrorism in and out of USA. However, some of these laws have brewed controversy among the Citizens it is supposed to protect. Some civil rights groups and liberal lawmakers are questioning the ability of these laws to be applied without hurting the Americans it is supposed to protect.

Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the United States, once said “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In America’s society today, some are willing to sacrifice their civil liberties in order to gain protection and security over some potential threat. Especially after the events of September 11th and several attempted bombings in U.S. cities. This sacrifice of individual freedoms such as the freedom of speech, expression, the right to information, to new technologies, and so forth, for additional protection is more of a loss than a gain. Citizens of the United States deserve equal liberty and safety overall, as someone should not have to give up

Finally, security loses its worth if not accompanied by rights. Benjamin Franklin states that "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither liberty or safety" Without Liberty, Security is purposeless. The entire purpose of national security is to protect the American way of life and what our nation

The average home isn’t anywhere near as secure as we’d like to think. Worse than that, the conventional wisdom that is passed off as “home security advice” is just about worthless. All it does is to help keep honest people honest—not keep the dishonest out. Why, you can kick the average front door with a deadbolt wide open!

Security can be defined as the “freedom from danger, risk, etc. with the absence of threats to assimilated principles” or a “low chance of damage to assimilated principles.” However, the word security originates from the Latin Securus, which means “carefree”. Notice that the very definition of the word clues to the term “freedom”. The aforementioned definition of security is very general. It does not stipulate the individual whose security is at issue or the types of values pliable to being secured. The security of people (“human security”) is understood to extend beyond national security, also comprising of economic welfare, the health of the environment, cultural identity, and political rights. Security began to take on a diverse set of restrictions with the Alien and Sedition Acts of the 1790s. We would see a drastic change after September 11, 2011.

In the last decade it’s amazing how technology has advanced over the years and will continue to advance for many years to come. Every year there is a new cell phone from Apple or Samsung, with new features that make our lives more convenient. From faster software to higher picture quality and so on. I am unable to recall the last time I used a camera to take pictures or went to the bank to deposit a check. Technology advances every day and many can’t wait to see what’s next to come. But with new technology comes greater risk for violations of privacy. In the following research paper I will discuss the types of security breaches and the cost associated with these breaches that businesses around the world face on a daily basis.