Protection Vs. Privacy : The Government 's Use Of Surveillance

However, despite its unpopularity amongst many citizens, government surveillance still has many benefits to the society. In this essay we will discuss the advantages of government surveillance and espionage in detail. The following essay will discuss how government surveillance will counter terrorism and reduce crime rate which will lead to greater diplomacy, freedom, and increased sense of safety. In addition, the essay will discuss how government surveillance can help improve public health care system in Canada by allowing greater access to scientific data that may not be easily accessed. Last but not least, the essay will discuss how government surveillance may also be advantageous to Canadian economy by helping domestic businesses prosper and grow by increasing the efficiency of their business model.

The general public gives an problem with the government surveillance as a media for invading others privacy. With the government monitoring, collecting, and retaining people's personal data, one side would claim that it is an infringement of their freedom to the rights to privacy. While the National security associations justifies the reason for monitoring would be to maintain order. Their ways to maintain order would be to monitor criminal and terrorist activity and to detect incoming threats, terrorists, or problems that would harm their country. This issue shows that freedom cannot exist without order. Although the general public wants their freedom of their privacy, they can not achieve their most of their desires because it puts their lives at risk without protection. Order is necessary in order to have freedom. It is impossible to attain entire freedom for a cause, however, it is possible to attain freedom to a certain

The Internet powers our country. Not only do hundreds of millions of Americans use it daily, our government and states use it to do important national and international business. Our government already utilizes it to monitor the activity of its people. This monitoring has especially risen after events such as the Boston Bombing and the attacks of 9/11. The main reason that the government does this is to keep us safe. If the government puts more slack on this matter, then it will give a chance for terrorists to complete their objective. The normal person does not know how many terrorist attacks may have been stopped in the past years due to this surveillance, and how many lives it may have saved. Therefore, we cannot let our government halt

As a growing topic of discussion, privacy in our society has stirred quite some concern. With the increase of technology and social networking our standards for privacy have been altered and the boundary between privacy and government has been blurred. In the article, Visible Man: Ethics in a World Without Secrets, Peter Singer addresses the different aspects of privacy that are being affected through the use of technology. The role of privacy in a democratic society is a tricky endeavor, however, each individual has a right to privacy. In our society, surveillance undermines privacy and without privacy there can be no democracy.

Ever since the American public was made aware of the United States government’s surveillance policies, it has been a hotly debated issue across the nation. In 2013, it was revealed that the NSA had, for some time, been collecting data on American citizens, in terms of everything from their Internet history to their phone records. When the story broke, it was a huge talking point, not only across the country, but also throughout the world. The man who introduced Americans to this idea was Edward Snowden.

Government surveillance in the past was not a big threat due to the limitations on technology; however, in the current day, it has become an immense power for the government. Taylor, author of a book on Electronic Surveillance supports, "A generation ago, when records were tucked away on paper in manila folders, there was some assurance that such information wouldn 't be spread everywhere. Now, however, our life stories are available at the push of a button" (Taylor 111). With more and more Americans logging into social media cites and using text-messaging devices, the more providers of metadata the government has. In her journal “The Virtuous Spy: Privacy as an Ethical Limit”, Anita L. Allen, an expert on privacy law, writes, “Contemporary technologies of data collection make secret, privacy invading surveillance easy and nearly irresistible. For every technology of confidential personal communication…there are one or more counter-technologies of eavesdropping” (Allen 1). Being in the middle of the Digital Age, we have to be much more careful of the kinds of information we put in our digital devices.

Reason to Listen: As Daniel Sarewitz writes in Defending Democracy,“The time to start thinking about the impact of security technologies on democratic rights is during R&D.” Now, more than ever before should we as a country be worried about government surveillance. The government claims it is for our protection and sure they’re are some benefits. Terrorist attacks stopped, crime prevention, and leads to murders, rapes, and drug trafficking. But, where is the line drawn, how democratic is it really, and whose best interest is really in mind? Should stipulations be set? This topic is a hot discussion in newsrooms, classrooms and political institutions across the nation.

The usage of surveillance has become a massive part of the American court system by using it for evidence to convict a felon. One main concern on American’s minds is terrorists living in our country, where surveillance has been a massive contributor to ending. The terrorist group on the news today is ISIS which everyone is concerned about. According

Technology has undoubtedly increased dramatically within the recent decades. By developing new computers and inventing new machinery, new techniques in protection have been industrialized, as well. Especially after the tragedy of 9/11, the improvement of new surveillance techniques has been crucial. This greatly contrasts to the era of the Great Depression, when the government hardly offered assistance to struggling Americans who moved west. Despite this, these surveillance improvements have certainly gone to the point of intruding on the lives of Americans. Therefore, because of the development of technological advances in history, as well as the growing governmental powers, the role of government in society has advanced from hardly assisting

Thomas Jefferson once said that “Everyone has the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” If the government spied on its citizens, the citizens would carry the burden of having the government constantly watch every move being made, interfering with citizens pursuit of happiness. With that being said, if a citizen’s privacy was invaded then their pursuit of happiness would be demolished. The government should not be able to spy on its citizens because it is a major invasion of privacy, people become fearful of the government, and is a large violation of the rights citizens are permitted.

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.

These sides are clear. Which is understandable. Those government agencies were founded on the notion of protecting us, and that is a standard that as Americans we have come to expect. The September 11th attacks shook up that standard, bringing surveillance technology to the forefront of concern. The benefits these agencies uphold are deep-rooted in the ideals of keeping citizens safe. In an article published in The New York Post, Representative Vito Fossella (R) argues that the Patriot Act needs renewal to avoid turning “back the homeland-security clock to Sept. 10, 2001” (Fossella 2006). The fear of another national security breach such as Sept. 11th is what drives the pro side of the mass surveillance technology debate. From their perspective, surveillance technology is extremely

In regards to the increasing crime and terrorism rates in America, the optimal solution thus far is enhancing security throughout the nation. By doing so, policies, procedures, and protocols would be amended for the sole purpose of protecting the country. Such alterations should be made because it prevents crime in a timely, reliable, and successful manner, whilst preserving the fundamental rights of all United States Citizens. In light of the controversy over national security versus digital privacy, the government should partake in international surveillance because it inhibits potential crime and terrorism, it is quick, it is dependable, and it has been proven to be successful through past endeavors.

Many have argued that government surveillance is safe and provides security towards the United States. However, government surveillance programs do more harm than good because they invade civil liberties, plead innocent people to suffer unfair punishments, and ultimately fail to protect the citizens that they are designed to safeguard. For these reasons, programs operated by the National Security Agency and other surveillance organizations should be discontinued.

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.