The Digital Age Should Decease

When the colonist were drafting the constitution they couldn’t have imagined the tremendous growth we have achieved today. With innovation comes conflict. Many citizens feel the United States gives an illusion of freedom. Today the biggest conflicts are centered on basic rights spelled out in the constitution. It’s no secret the National Association of Surveillance illegally obtains information from the electronic devices of United States citizens. The actions of the NSA violate the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 9th amendment rights. The NSA’s use of information impedes on the first amendment in terms of freedom of press. For a journalist the source is the key, and the key stays confidential. With the NSA collecting digital trails there is a higher risk for whistle blowers to be charged with criminal act or even assassinated. The courts stand by the NSA, for

The personal rights that lead to a good life are important but the most important right is the right to privacy. People have been talking for years about the right of privacy. The use of computers made access to Americans personal data very easy. The government knowledge about people’s privacy and personal information can be a benefit to Americans but it also can lead to a serious damage. From the bright side, knowing these information makes it easier to pass social security checks, making medical

Since the time the framers of the constitution, technology has improved significantly which has led to an increasing concern in the privacy of an individual. Technology, used by government agencies and commercial enterprises, has led to a change in one’s privacy and freedom. For this reason, the agencies and enterprises have been called into question of infringement of the fourth. Using the lessons learned from history, the framers of the constitutions created the fourth amendment, which protects from unreasonable searches, and the fifth amendment, which prevents a person from incriminating himself or herself, to create a government with just laws, but with the advancement in technology, the fourth amendment needs to expand its policies to fit the changes in modern society.

Americans security and the Fourth Amendment have been conflicting since the origin of the amendment. Some Americans started to be at odds with whether their security is at risk with the amendment, yet other citizens feel that privacy is equally important. With the coming of the twenty first century complications between the two are certainly bound to occur. Since the coming of the digital age and mass production of personal electronics, people’s privacy becomes imminent. Simple reasoning shows America rebelled from Great Britain; and one of those reasons for America to fight for its independence is that there was no sensible privacy was being showed. Although the Fourth Amendment tries to protect the privacy of Americans data, it should be

Privacy is very important to some citizens, especially privacy in regards to personal and family matters. No one wants someone following and observing their every move, they also do not always enjoy the outside input of people who do not know their whole situations. The Fourth Amendment in the Constitution “protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government” (What Does the Fourth Amendment Mean?). This has provided citizens with a way to protect their privacy and prohibits the government and law officials from search through one’s personal and private belongings without having a cause to do so. The amendment “is not a guarantee against all searches and seizures, but only those that are deemed unreasonable under the law” (What Does the Fourth Amendment Mean?). Those who are not participating in illegal activities and have given no reason for their property to be searched are protected by this amendment. However, those who have provided law enforcement with a reason to search their property should be presented with a warrant justifying the search and seizure.

The Fourth Amendment makes certain that people are protected within themselves and “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.” Although the Fourth Amendment protects the privacy of people, today’s technology has led to privacy issues that need to be addressed. For illustration, when people comment on Twitter, Twitter and a few other digital companies keep all the comments a person has ever posted. Similarly, warrants must be used at all times if people are seizing information from someone, but searching through metadata does not need a warrant and there is no cause. Another issue is surveillance captures people with cameras, and people who have not committed a crime are still being watched, but security people do not need a warrant

Privacy is a freedom that many people don’t recognize, but is essential to many. Personal information; social security numbers, passwords, text messages, etc., are now available online, and are kept personal, right? As the internet is becoming more and more accessible, everyone’s digital footprint is growing. Since the government has easy access to this information, privacy, free speech, and security suffer. The fourth amendment protects tangible items, but it never said anything about digital items. I propose a new amendment, that our digital footprint be protected, and out of the hands of the government, the only exception being in a criminal case. They should not be able to search through it as they please, just as they are not allowed to

To continue, an article titled, “How the NSA’s Surveillance Proceeds Threaten America’s Privacy”, talks about the FSIA Amendment

The common thread throughout all four arguments for civil liberties—historical backing, refined legality, obligatory morality, and economic responsibility—is that each is personal to citizens. The Fourth Amendment was written for American citizens. The laws enforced in this nation are for the people’s safety. The social contract is in place to balance the relationship between government and society. And the government security agencies are funded by the citizens through taxes. The initial two questions were “is government collection of personal data under the argument of national security just, and, if not, what would be an alternative to protecting American citizens?” The resolving answer is that the collection of data is unprotected, immoral,

As the Fourth Amendment recognizes the right to privacy, its application has the tendency to spark debate among individuals (Peak).

While there are many benefits provided by the Patriot Act, the program also incorporates drawbacks, chiefly, American citizen’s freedom is being weakened. Corresponding, the Fourth Amendment is being taken advantage of; the protection to citizen’s privacy from government invasion, and no warrant shall be issued without probable cause (Wex Legal Dictionary). With this intention, subpoenas are often obtained rather than a warrant, and the use of technology to record citizen’s information is reducing the Fourth Amendment. Not only is the Fourth Amendment being weakened, but so is our freedom of speech. Moreover, the Patriot Act can easily be abused, crippling the Fourth Amendment, leaving Americans with less freedom than what was written for them

As Americans citizens privacy is a fundamental Human Right and its concerning when our rights are violated.

We need to base our decisions and arguments off of the U.S constitution that has been our guideline for over 200 years. According to a New Associated Press GFC poll, Americans are increasingly placing personal privacy ahead of national security. Over 60 percent of people polled said they value privacy over anti-terror protections. We have to elect politicians that will take action against such outrageous legislations and regulations. I believe we have to fight for our individual liberties before we lose the; nothing comes easy so we must start

Most American citizens believe they have the right to privacy because it's stated in the constitution. However, nowhere in the constitution does it state the right to privacy. At first, this may seem like a bad thing, but upon closer inspection it's actually beneficial. American Citizens should give up some of their privacy because not only does it offer better security, but it can also help catch criminals, make life more convenient, and protect students. By allowing the government to access some of one's privacy, they can help catch criminals. The FBI is preparing a vast biometrics database and if all goes well a police officer or border patrol can "run a 10-fingerprint check... and within seconds know if the person is on a database of the most wanted criminals and

In the major decision construing and applying Exemption 7c, United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989), the Supreme Court noted the need, under the statute, to balance the interests of openness and accountability against the statutory recognition of individual privacy. The justices unanimously rejected claims of access to a suspect’s rap sheet, noting the vital distinction (in FOIA) between the statute’s “purpose to ensure that the Government’s activities be opened to the sharp eye of public scrutiny” and the contrasting claim that “information about private citizens that happens to be in the