Should Students Be Allowed To Violate The Law

Citizens do not always fully understand legislation before becoming angry at someone. Who better to point a finger at than their government (Zuckerman para 7)? Despite the actual legal terms on surveillance, innocent citizens feel that they have had their rights violated and wonder why the government needs their information if they have nothing to hide. The supreme court declared in the third party doctrine that “anyone turning over information to a third party, such as a bank or Internet service provider, has no right to object if that information is later shared with the government” (Timberg para 11). Whether they understand the law or not, most people feel that their information should not be unnecessarily subjected to the government without their voiced approval (Zuckerman para 6). “Quite simply, the administration could have done a much better job of explaining both the potential and the limits of data mining. It should have made it clear

Privacy is, and should continue to be, a fundamental dimension of living in a free, democratic society. Laws protect “government, credit, communications, education, bank, cable, video, motor vehicle, health, telecommunications, children’s and financial information; generally carve out exceptions for disclosure of personal information; and authorize the use of warrants, subpoenas, and court orders to obtain the information.” (Protecting Individual Privacy in the Struggle Against Terrorists: A Framework for Program Assessment, 2008) This is where a lot of people feel as though they have their privacy violated. Most Americans are law-abiding citizens who do not commit illegal acts against the country, they want to go about their lives, minding their own business and not having to worry about outside interference. The fine line between privacy and National Security may not be so fine in everyone’s mind. While it is the job of government agencies to ensure the overall safety of the country and those living in it, the citizens that obey the law and do not do anything illegal often wonder why they are subject to any kind of search, when they can clearly point out, through documentation, that they have never done anything wrong.

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.

Should school officials and police officers be allowed to search through students phones? School officials and police officers should be allowed to search students phones. School officials and police officers need to be able to check students phones, so they can keep everyone safe. Some people think that school officials shouldn’t be able to search students phones, instead it should be the parents problem.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…” Sound familiar? Well it should. That quote was a section of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Those lines are one of the many things that set America apart from other countries around the world. It has protected us for centuries from “unreasonable searches and seizures…” made by anyone, including the government. This is all beginning to change with the inventions of the smartphone, computer, and even GPS. These inventions have possibly turned our world for the better, or maybe even for the worse.

Darin, I agree with all of your points except one. In your response, you stated, "For example, according to the 4th amendment in the US Constitution, people have a right to be private and their privacy can't be violated for any reason." This piece of evidence is not true. Any law enforcement officer may search you or your property without a warrant, as long as they have a strong suspicion that you are about to, or are in the act of committing a crime. I would suggest rewording the statement or find a different statement, because the one you have used isn’t

I understand the view that the vast majority of citizens are comfortable with the searches because they have nothing to hide. However, I’m worried what the government will do once they're used to being a part of our private lives. The relationship between the government should and privacy of the people should be regulated with caution. I say this, because what if a dictator had mass surveillance in their arsenal? Imagine if Hitler was able to monitor phone calls. Imagine if Stalin could read massive amounts of private communication. How would we combat an enemy that can easily access all our forms of

I believe many people are unhappy with the provisions of the Patriot Act because it gives government officials the right to invade your personal space. The Patriot Act which stands for; "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001" enables the freedom of association, information, unreasonable searches, the right to a speedy and public trial, and the right to liberty. Americans do not like their privacy being invaded; although government officials think it’s a reasonable case to protect our society some things should be considerate with entering personal private settings. Phone tapping, computer/internet searches, searches of homes or business without notifying the

Privacy is a natural right that needs to be kept because if it is not a free society cannot function as one. If we give up our total privacy, we give up our freedom, which in essence throws away our liberal society. Every individual enjoys the act of being alone because it allows him or her to be themselves without facing any type of judgment. Every individual would cringe at the thought of being watched at all hours, while eating, sleeping, communicating, or participating in another activity. I would would feel embarrassed and petrified to know that every time I took a shower I was being watched. Everyone enjoys his or her right to privacy in America. In my opinion, the government has no right to invade our privacy because not everyone is a criminal and gather all this information

Public high school students have the First Amendment right of free expression and the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches while they’re at school. These protections extend a student’s social media and to the digital contents of their cell phones. At the same time, public high schools have special characteristics associated with their duty to educate students and provide a safe and orderly place conducive to learning and so students accept greater restrictions of their constitutional rights while in school. At issue with respect to Rocktown High School’s 2016 AP History class is whether the school’s “search” of history student’s social media “friends,” obtained under threat of suspension, was reasonable, whether the

The government abuses the power of surveillance in many ways such as personal needs, discrimination, or profiling. In an article from a CNN Justice Reporter, Evan Perez, he says that intelligence officials have tried to defend the NSA’s surveillance activities by saying the agency doesn’t misuse its authority. There are many instances where this assertation is not true. For example, in a case in 2004 a civilian employee told NSA security that she had spied on a foreign phone number because she found it on her husband’s cell phone and suspected he was being unlawful. (Perez) This case highlights how surveillance that should be used for national security is being used to fulfill personal needs. The government is also abusing the power of surveillance with both profiling and discrimination. In a case called Hassan v. City of New York there are multiple instances of profiling based on someone’s religion. The case was about Muslim Americans who were unlawfully targeted under surveillance because of their Muslim identity or activism. (CCR) This case demonstrates innocent people being monitored for the sake of national

The rights of the people in America should not be infringed upon because these rights are guaranteed. And if abused, it not only infringes the rights of the people, but also diminishes the moral code of citizens of the United States. Furthermore, the civil rights that have protected people from the government now seem like they are being taken away from the government itself. The government has given itself the privilege to tap our phones, read and scan emails, access bank accounts, invade homes, and detain someone indefinitely. All of this is happening without any prior legal courses of action or our knowledge. This right to privacy, a fundamental liberty that is implied by the fourth amendment in the U.S. constitution, continues to be infringed upon by the government.

Americans have the right to know what personal information of theirs is being monitored by the government and if the government is operating in a constitutional manner. Although the top priority of government should be to protect Americans from international threats, it must do so without infringing on basic human rights. I believe that the Supreme Court rulings and laws regarding privacy are a good balance of protection and respect to privacy. However, government agencies such as the NSA have certainly overstepped their ground in many cases and abused clauses within the

In 2010, a law was placed that required schools to serve up more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. The law's strict standards led to schools putting out healthier meals, but cafeterias still reported losing money. The School Nutrition Association, made up of school cafeteria administrators, lobbied Congress and demanded more flexibility. The association says that it has become increasingly difficult to keep paying students in lunch lines. Now, after the Senate Agriculture Committee voted in support of the compromise plan, schools are hopeful that they will finally get the flexibility they asked for.

Place yourself in the safety and comfort of your home, under the belief that “everyone has the right to the use and enjoyment of his property” (Department of International Law), searching, emailing, and talking about things that may be frowned upon by others. Now imagine the raw feelings of fear and deception that would wash over you upon seeing Edward Snowden’s statement on how “the U.S. government is destroying privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they 're secretly building.” You may initially feel betrayed, but Obama formally announced that the NSA acts solely in the name of safety right? Have we begun to sacrifice the freedom and