The Privacy Of The National Security

The Patriot Act was hastily passed just a month later October and it severely limited the privacy of Americans and gave unprecedented power to the government and private agencies to track innocent Americans, turning regular citizens into suspects.5 In addition, the great technological evolution and emerged of social media that occurred round the same time, and shortly thereafter, created the perfect storm for the emergence of the largely unregulated surveillance society that we live in today.6 The result is digitization of people’s personal and professional lives so that every single digital trace that people leave can be identified, stored, and aggregated to constitute a composite sketch of ourselves and its only getting worse. In 2008, passed the FISA Amendments Act, which expands the government’s authority to monitor Americans’ international communications, in addition to domestic communications.7 In short, after 9/11 the U.S is left with a national surveillance state, in which “the proliferation of government technology and bureaucracies that are able to acquire vast and detailed amounts of digital information about individuals with minimal or no judicial supervision and often in complete secrecy,” giving the government and corporations with access to the data that the government compiles the ability to single

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

After the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11th, 2001 the United States became a very different place. This drastic change was caused by the initial emotional reactions that American citizens, as well as government leaders had towards the tragic event. The government, in an effort to assure that these events never happen again passed the USA PATRIOT Act, which is an acronym that stands for the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act. The major goal of this act is to combat terrorism by giving the government more leeway in what areas they are allowed to use their surveillance tools and also to what circumstances these tools can be used. The major issue that arise with this act are the fact that many of the act can be seen as unconstitutional.

The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA PATRIOT Act) is one of the most controversial pieces of legislation to ever pass through the US Senate. Its critics use fear mongering tactics to scare people into opposition of an intrusive police state which they believe is inevitable given the government’s new powers. They consider the Act an assault on civil liberties and an invasion of the privacy of innocent American citizens. Yet the real issue is not that the government now has new powers, it’s that the American people do not trust our intelligence agencies to handle these new powers properly while still respecting their rights.

In the year 2015, with new technology and social media citizens of Americans can see terrorist acts on a daily basis. They feel as if the Patriot Act doesn’t work and they think that it doesn 't need to be used anymore. They believe it is an invasion of privacy. However, we need this act for our protection. For example, the group ISIS in Iraq and Syria, is a terrorist group. They have plotted schemes to attack the US. This Patriot Act has caught many people trying to get to ISIS as well. The US has a population of about 319 million. 365 days a year the government is scanning phone calls, text messages and social media in order to catch possible terrorist attacks. Before the Patriot Act this would not be possible. In 2011 President Barack Obama signed to extend the Patriot Act. That year 42% of the politicians said that the act was a necessary tool ( PewResearchCenter Public Remains Divided Over the Patriot act (pewresearch) 15, February 2011 13,May 2015). Overall the Patriot Act is still necessary for the world we live in.

The United States of America is undoubtedly one of the world’s largest and most powerful nations. However, it has been facing the problem of terrorism for many decades, most notably after the tragic events of September 11th. The Patriot Act was passed shortly after these events in response to the acts of terrorism witnessed by the whole nation. At the time, it seemed rational and logical to allow this bill to pass, due to the extreme anger of American citizens, and the willingness to fight against terrorism. However, certain breaches of privacy came with the introduction of the Patriot Act. We as Americans want to feel protected from the threats of terrorism, however, we are not willing to give up certain privacies and liberties in order for that to happen, even when put to a vote.

The Patriot Act came into existence upon signing into law by the President George Bush. This Act of the Congress was meant to unite the Americans as they fight and intercept the different acts of terrorism (Doyle 2). Through the act, appropriate tools necessary for the execution of the mandates were provided. The act allows the empowered surveillance bodies to search for the different business records, rove through the wiretaps and carries out surveillance on the persons who are suspected to be terrorists or linked to terrorist-related activities. Owing to the powerful nature of the act, several issues have been raised concerning the validity and appropriateness of the act. Most of the issues raised point towards the morality aspect of the act. One issue of concern is privacy of individuals as far as the execution of Patriot Act is concerned (Doyle 2).

The attacks on the United States of America on September 11th, 2001 fundamentally changed the way the government and its citizens viewed freedom and liberty. With the subsequent enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act, security became the government’s top priority. (The USA PATRIOT Act is an acronym which stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.) Congress, eager to put a law on the books to prevent another attack, fast tracked the bill through both houses in six weeks. It passed by a near unanimous vote, with the majority of dissent coming from Democrats. A highly contentious and debated law, the USA PATRIOT Act infringes on Natural Law and the American citizen’s Civil Liberties. Also it violates the spirit and letter of the United States Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights. Many amendments in the Constitution are at a direct contrast with the law’s many broadly worded sections, specifically the First Amendment’s right to free speech and freedom of assembly, and the Fourth Amendment’s guard against unwarranted and illegal search and seizure.

The Patriot Act, an act passed by Congress in 2001 that addressed the topic of privacy in terrorist or radical situations, is controversial in today's society. Although it helps with protection against terroristic events, The Patriot Act is not fair, nor is it constitutional, because it allows the government to intrude on citizens' privacy, it gives governmental individuals too much power, and because the act is invasive to the 4th amendment right. To further describe key points in the act, it states that it allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking, and it allows law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred.

Many innocent Americans lives were taken by an act of terrorism on September 11, 2001. This has terrorized many people who lost loved ones on this day. There was much controversy among the government’s officials and American citizens on what the course of action is to prevent this tragedy from happening again. After many days of formulating a plan, A bill was passed on October 26, 2001 by George W. Bush to help solve this issue. This new regulation became know as the Patriot Act. This bill provided the government the necessary tools to intercept American citizens private information, which would help discover suspicious activity among suspected terrorists threats. The main bill’s focus was to help prevent future terrorists from executing their malicious attacks. Despit the law’s ability to keep this country safe, we sacrifice some of our freedom for the good of each of us. Although the American government has retrieved personal information throughout history, our civil liberties should be preserved along with the safety of our exclusive information from the United States government.

The Patriot Act was created after September 11, 2001, to protect the American people from terrorism. Specifically, it allows the FBI to implement a critical vetting process. This process involves

The USA Patriot Act was supposed to help the government find terrorists and prevent another attack, like the attacks on September 11th from happening again. However, there were many constitutional questions that surfaced with regard to the USA Patriot Act. The act gave the government more power than it had before September 11th. It allowed the government to put the rights of citizens aside, when the government thought that a person might be involved with terrorist activity. I will begin by discussing the contents of the USA Patriot Act and what questions might arise. I will then present some scenarios where the Patriot Act was used to justify the civil liberties of Americans being limited, and if the government’s suspicions were correct or

The laws of our country are very important to us and are what makes us unique from other nations. When something like the USA PATRIOT Act is passed, this law interferes with the privacy of citizens and contradicts our constitutional rights. The USA PATRIOT Act is one of the laws that has ignited a heated debate as many people criticize its abuse in implementation. The PATRIOT Act launched in 2001 as a reaction to the increased stress of terrorism attacks. The main purpose of the deed was to intercept the obstacles that made the process of detecting terrorist attacks difficult and slow. The Act gave the FBI the right to make urgent searches and arrests without having any arrest warrant or even a court order. This was to facilitate speedy action against suspects of terrorist acts. It is clear that the PATRIOT Act paved way for abuse of citizens’ rights of privacy and this was a full disregard for the constitution.

“The consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival” (Orwell). The world today is full of many dangers domestic and abroad. It has become a routine in the news to report on the daily mass shooting or update with the war on terror. We live in a world where being worried is justified; however, we should not give up our constitutional rights in the face of fear. The NSA’s dragnet surveillance programs, such as PRISM, are both ineffective and are surpassed by less questionable national security programs. The FISA court's’ approval of NSA actions are not only illegal, but exist as an embarrassing formality. Surveillance is a necessary

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