The Pros And Cons Of Instructors Personal Information

During a time in which white supremacy was being challenged by an ever-increasing African population, a woman named Margaret Sanger “sought to purify America’s breeding stock and purge America’s bad stains” (Planned Parenthood). She set out to establish the American Birth Control League, which eventually became the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA). Sanger’s actions provoked much controversy because at the time not only was contraception illegal in the United States, but it was denounced by almost every major religious denomination (Contraception History). Margaret Sanger set out on a mission to overcome first the church and then the state in order to “stop bringing to

“God is Dead” is what one College professor made is philosophy class write down on a piece of paper on the first day of his class in a public university. Most students did it for they were promised an “A” in the course, but if they did not write down the statement they were guaranteed an “F” in the class. A Christian student in the class, who strongly believed in God, argued against his professor telling him how God is not dead. This scenario was made into a popular movie called “God Not’s Dead” that came out in 2014. More situations like this are popping up all over colleges in America,which raises the question should educators be able to voice their personal opinions onto their students. College professors, especially in a public education system should not reflect their personal opinions onto the student population for any political, religious, and personal views..

Technology has become very effective for a thriving generation, but it also possesses a handful of flaws that counter the benefits. Technologies help people post and deliver a message in a matter of seconds in order to get a message spread quickly. It also gives individuals the power to be the person they want to be by only showing one side of themselves. But sometimes information that had intentions of remaining protected gets out. That information is now open for all human eyes to see. This information, quite frankly, becomes everybody’s information and can be bought and sold without the individual being aware of it at all. However, this is no accident. Americans in the post 9/11 era have grown accustomed to being monitored. Government entities such as the NSA and laws such as the Patriot Act have received power to do so in order to protect security of Americans. However, the founding fathers wrote the fourth amendment to protect against violations of individual’s privacy without reason. In a rapidly growing technological world, civil liberties are increasingly being violated by privacy wiretapping from government entities such as the NSA, Patriot Act and the reduction of the Fourth Amendment.

robust privacy protections already in place at DHS without risking exposure of personal data by: Enhancing DHS’s already robust Privacy Office to ensure the NCCIC complies with all civilian laws that protect Americans’ privacy and civil liberties. Requiring private companies to ‘scrub’ and remove personal information

As an American, we know, and are immune to this country starting to build on technology. Where every call or click online can be traced back, stored, searched and put together to reveal a portrait of private life. However, current law gives little privacy protection to information about these activities, overstepping the First and Fourth Amendment safeguards that are guaranteed to individual freedoms. There are two cases to be discussed, Smith v. Maryland and United States v. Miller, two of the most important Fourth Amendment decisions of the 20th century. “In these two cases, the Court held that people are not entitled to an expectation of privacy in information they voluntarily provide to third parties” (Thompson, para. 1). This proposition, know as the third-party doctrine, permits the government access to a vast amount of information about individuals, such as the websites they visit, who they have emailed, the phone numbers they call, and their utility, banking, and education records.

In the effort to prove to the people that new gun laws are obscured, Sheriff John Cooke, Weld County, gave a speech where he held up two 30-round magazines. He held one up that he had purchased before the new law that stated the possession, sale, or transfer of large-capacity magazines went into effect. The other magazine, he claimed, may have been purchased afterwards. Cooke proceeded to challenge the audience by shuffling the magazines and asking them which was which. Therefore, the audience was able to acknowledge that the new law was abstruse and near impossible to enforce. After the mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut, Colorado’s gun advocates view their new laws as a triumph. But If those who have to enforce these laws such as Sheriff Cooke show any sign of lack of faith in these new laws, they will start to diminish in the eyes of the state. This act is already taking shape by sheriffs refusing to enforce the laws on the grounds of them being too vague and violating individual’s second amendment rights. Other sheriffs are ruling the laws as “low priority”. In May, 55 of 62 sheriffs in the state of Colorado signed a federal lawsuit, challenging the constitutionality of the statutes

In the year of 2017, it is hard to find any person whose life does not revolve around their electronic devices. The Internet has changed the way people function, and become a crucial resource in schools, workplaces, and homes all over the world. There are people who feel they could not survive a day without it, and, of course, there are people who are wary of its dangers. Children are taught from a young age to tread carefully when using the Internet, and teenagers can recite lectures they have received from their parents time and time again: “Don’t talk to strangers,” “Be careful what you download,” and most importantly, “Never share your personal information online.” What most of these parents do not know, however, is that you do not have to share your personal information for it to be collected. Not only is your information collected without your consent—it can legally be used against you. Many statutes involving Internet surveillance were rudimentary and non-invasive at their creation, but on October 26th, 2001, everything changed. The Patriot Act was signed into law, just forty-five days after the horrifying terrorist attack on the Twin Towers. The USA PATRIOT Act, more commonly known as the Patriot Act, was not a single piece of legislature, but a package of amendments to preexisting laws. The most notable changes in the Patriot Act are the amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1968 (ECPA),

America was founded of the ideals of free speech and equality, but if one tries to exercise these rights to the fullest extent, one’s privacy would be jeopardized. The purpose

In high school, a parent has to be aware of everything that goes on with their child's life. Then their child grows up and blossoms into an adult that continues their education into college. There in college the parents of these blossoms are no longer as aware of what goes on with their school life. These parents have little control over what goes on academically and socially while their adult children are in college. In the article, “College Kids Have Too Much Privacy” Michele Willins shows us that parents have a right to know what is going on with their children’s college life.

The government and major companies have frequently leaked and misused the public’s information. For example, in Ted Koppel’s 2005 article on “Take My Privacy, Please!”, he mentions how Bank of America lost personal information on about 1.2 million federal government employees, including some senators. LexisNexis unintentionally gave outsiders access to personal files on over 310,000 people. Time Warner

Privacy is what allows people to feel secure in their surroundings. With privacy, one is allowed to withhold or distribute the information they want by choice, but the ability to have that choice is being violated in today’s society. Benjamin Franklin once said, “He who sacrifices freedom or liberty will eventually have neither.” And that’s the unfortunate truth that is and has occurred in recent years. Privacy, especially in such a fast paced moving world, is extremely vital yet is extremely violated, as recently discovered the NSA has been spying on U.S. citizens for quite a while now; based on the Fourth Amendment, the risk of leaked and distorted individual information, as well as vulnerability to lack of anonymity.

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.

Some Christians don’t support the use of capital punishment because the 6th commandment forbids murder. The 10 commandments are very important and every christian has to adhere them therefore, they believe that it is wrong to use capital punishment because you are taking someone’s life/murdering them and you are not allowed to do that because all life is holy and belongs to God therefore,he should be the one to give or take life.Also, Jesus through out his life gave people a chance to reform themselves but capital punishment doesn’t give the offender a chance to learn from his/her mistake and christians should be following in Jesus’s footsteps. So, basically, capital punishment goes against christian beliefs.

What will you do if you have access to everyone’s personal information? In “Your Digital Trail, and How it Can Be Used Against You” from NPR, author G.W. Schulz & Daniel Zwerdling describe how easy the government or any other agency could get people’s personal information. After the rise of crime and terrorist attacks in the US, the government passed an ACT in order to get access to citizens’ health information. A research warrant, a court order or a subpoena are also used to get anyone’s personal information. While some people mention that having access to American’s personal information could help prevent crimes, be more secure or help to catch criminals, others argue that they do not have privacy, could be used against us or third parties could have easy access. I believe the US government should be allowed to use digital information because could help to find lost people, could be used for criminal prosecution and help to protect the life of others.

Sharing your personal information on social media site is not a good idea. Why? Due to the problems that have occurred, many people think that they can trust the internet and share their information when really they are wrong. Once people share their information on social media sites they are potentially inviting trouble for them, this would give another user a chance for stealing their information. However, the social media site can be used in a good way, with positive purpose.