Privacy vs. Security

Freedom vs security: Can we have both, or are we forced to choose between the two? What about our 4th amendment rights, which protects the rights of Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures? Are the crimes solved and prevented by technology and surveillance worth giving up our freedom and right to privacy? Countless people are already aware about the NSA surveillance of collecting metadata of our internet and phone records through the Patriot Act that many consider spying; thanks to the leak from Edward Snowden, who blew the lid off of government secrecy because it violated his moral and ethical standards. Many regard Snowden as a true patriot and a hero; while to others, he is a traitor and a criminal. Considering foreign and domestic

Although the cameras keep track of people for most of their lifetime outside their homes, the surveillance is necessary to regulate citizens and prevent them from doing criminal activity. Cameras control a large part of people’s lives, with purpose “to enforce good laws... to track the government’s political enemies, to gather ammunition for blackmail, and so on,” (Volokh 9). Cameras do not watch everyday activities to observe where one needs to go, but they are there to examine the cities for thieves and vandals. While these cameras appear in almost every part of the city, and people are unaware of what information of theirs is being taken away, the government or city does not scrutinize and judge people for everything they do. Unless a recent crime has occurred and the police requires its usage to track down the suspect, only then would a footage be released for the public regarding the criminal. Otherwise, other trivial and personal information about where one goes is not revealed. Whether the information is recorded or not, it does not affect the normal citizens who live in the area who have done nothing

“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves”(Reagan). In the book, 1984, Winston recognizes the power the government has over the citizens of Oceania. The citizens lack privacy from the government. George Orwell warns society about a government with total control in 1984. Based on Dana Hawkin’s article, “Cheap Video Cameras Are Monitoring Our Every Move”, as well as Beech Etal’s, “The Other Side of the Great Firewall”, society may truly have something to fear in the form of surveillance and information manipulation.

Defining National Security VS Personal Privacy is a matter of looking at the basic nature of each. From research collected there is a consensus that we need balance. Too much of one hurts the other and vise versa. There are a couple of articles that range from Civil Liberties to the birth of public right to know that support the overall claim. Talks about the effects of censorship in different situations like war and peace will help prove that a balance needs to be forged. The problem here isn’t the definition of personal vs national security, but the survival of each in light of each other. There is history in our nation

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.

Which one would you rather have, privacy or national security? Look at it this way, you are offered a room with safety from any harm with food and shelter for the rest of your life but you would be under surveillance of the government who would know absolutely everything that you do including who you text, your friends, what you say on social media, and every other aspect of your life. Or you have the ability to travel down the road of endless possibilities with the chance of getting hurt or even death but you would have to fend for yourself. In today’s world, terrorism poses a high threat against most Western Countries including The United States of America as shown by many terrorism plots like 9/11, a shooting attack at a night club, or

Since the birth of America the United States has made the use of intelligence known through the purposes of warfare, defense, and diplomacy. Intelligence is the gathering of information which is analyzed and converted into data to serve as an asset to the decision making process. This is possible by identifying what the national interest is at the time. We use intelligence to provide information based off everyday observations and activities to give us a sense of patterns to form an idea of the “big picture” and identify what threats may be imminent at the time. With reference to Homeland Security Intelligence is not to solely acquire life threatening data, rather than should be to analyzes and share information between the private sector,

Ever since day one, people have been developing and creating all sorts of new methods and machines to help better everyday life in one way or another. Who can forget the invention of the ever-wondrous telephone? And we can’t forget how innovative and life-changing computers have been. However, while all machines have their positive uses, there can also be many negatives depending on how one uses said machines, wiretapping in on phone conversations, using spyware to quietly survey every keystroke and click one makes, and many other methods of unwanted snooping have arisen. As a result, laws have been made to make sure these negative uses are not taken advantage of by anyone. But because of how often technology changes, how can it be

Many people can’t seem to agree on whether or not they should have more privacy or loses some privacy, and be more supervised. In both articles, each author is trying to inform the readers and state the possible consequences of having too much privacy or not enough supervision. In the article “The Eternal Value of Privacy” by Bruce Schneier and the article “In the battle between privacy and security, security always wins” by Chris Cillizza you will see which article has the best logical argument on whether or not, the privacy article or the surveillance article was best stated .

Would the American people be willing to give up their privacy, freedom, happiness, and decision making in exchange for government protection? What if the government took away these rights against their will? In America, this is slowly becoming a reality when regarding the right to privacy. This right has been stripped from Americans for many years, and the violation is only going to create greater problems. The American government and its agencies are illegally collecting the private and personal information of the America people. There are people willing to surrender their rights and people fighting to protect their freedom. The purpose of this essay is to inform all these types of individuals about the government and their so-called national

People in America are having their rights that regard privacy taken away. This nation's security is related to the Writs of Assistance.The Writs of Assistance was passed in 1761. This law was forced on the colonists by British rule. It was an order issued by the court that commanded law enforcement officials to search any home for smuggled goods. This law was an invasion of privacy towards the colonists. Officials could come into their homes without a search warrant. The Writs of Assistance and the United State’s security are both spying on the people’s personal information. Having privacy dominates over having security because privacy is more important for the citizens of the United States, the company Apple was right to not unlock the phones

The topic of national security vs. personal privacy, in recent events, has been very controversial regarding which is more appropriate. On one hand, the government can search through personal, private files without any consent from the owner, thus making the information no longer private. The opposing side argues that the government is invading personal privacy of innocent civilians, violating the Fourth Amendment Rights to prohibit unreasonable searches and seizures. Both have valid points, both positive and negative; however, the invasion of personal privacy by the law is only justified in a dire, life or death situation. The government should not have the ability to view private information in an everyday situation because it is a strong violation of the Fourth Amendment, it is too invasive, and it bypasses the limits of personal privacy when necessary. Therefore, the government should not be able to view personal, private information of civilians unless absolutely necessary.

Privacy is something that is valuable, and gives trust to both sides. Everyone is endowed with some degree of privacy, right? The debate of the topic privacy versus security has been going on for a while. Most people believe privacy is more important, giving people the chance to be relaxed without anyone watching them, literally or figuratively speaking. Governments believe that security is more important, claiming it will help with terrorism and lower the crime rate. If we allow this to happen, then as an example, the government could monitor our phones conversations, what websites we visit, the games or programs we download, even where we go throughout our day by tracking us on the GPS unit in our smartphones.

The attacks on American soil that solemn day of September 11, 2001, ignited a quarrel that the grade of singular privacy, need not be given away in the hunt of grander security. The security measures in place were planned to protect our democracy and its liberties yet, they are merely eroding the very existence with the start of a socialistic paradigm. Benjamin Franklin (1759), warned more than two centuries ago: “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Implementing security measures comes at a cost both economically and socially. Government bureaucrats can and will utilize information for personal political objectives. The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator

"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing." -- Helen Keller