Helen Arielle B. Sanchez September 22, 2014 Communication Skills 1 DLSL-FGMR Topic: What is more important National Security or Our Privacy? Thesis Statement: “Citizens of this country should value the national security more than their privacy since it is concerned with a much larger group of people in order to protect our country from invaders, to maintain the survival of our country and to prevent airing of criticism of government.” Explore the National Security National security is more important than personal privacy because it concerns a much larger group of people. If someone is innocent, they should have nothing to hide. In a world where terrorism is a reality, it is more important to protect the safety of a country than for a few people avoid being inconvenienced.. What do you have to hide? It is always better to be safe rather than sorry, because this could really help limit the number of terrorist attacks that affect our country and take so many precious lives so really what are you doing that you don 't want the government to know about? It protects us by maintaining effective arm forces, using counterintelligence service or secret police to protect the nation from internal threat, implementing civil defense and emergency preparedness measures. It is really effective because as we are experiencing I can say that it helps our country’s safety. Also because it lessens counterterrorism. Some advantages of national security are, it can protect us from
The money spent on protecting our country has went up greatly of the years since 9-11.(Green, 2014, para. 7) 9-11 made people to question if our country is really secure. This caused the government to make a lot of polices to help make our country safe for the people living there. These polices focused on security, immigration, defense and etc. One main focus of the government was security.
Subsequent, to the September 11th,2001 terrorist attacks, the Department of Justice proposed The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act) to prevent future terroristic attacks. According to Preserving Life and Liberty article, the PATRIOT ACT has played an imperative part in “a number of successful operations to protect innocent Americans from plans of terrorist dedicated to destroying America and our way of life.” Further, Rosemary Jenks emphases in her article “A Summary of the Anti-Terrorism Law’s Immigration – Related Provision” that the PATRIOT Act focuses mainly on “reinforcing the arsenal of tools available to the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and federal prosecutors for identifying and disabling terrorist networks operating both
Some Americans believe that the Patriot Act is a violation of privacy, but the government takes crucial steps to ensure the privacy of all law-abiding Americans. Despite contrary beliefs, the
Non-state actors attempt to attack the U.S. and recruit U.S. citizens to participate in attacks against our homeland without warning. The prospect of terrorist attacks on our homeland from non-state actors or our own radicalized homegrown terrorists has increased a
Nowadays, “privacy” is becoming a popular conversation topic. Many people believe that if they do not do anything wrong in the face of technology and security, then they have nothing to hide. Professor Daniel J. Solove of George Washington University Law School, an internationally known expert in privacy law, wrote the article Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’, published in The Chronicle of Higher Education in May of 2011. Solove explains what privacy is and the value of privacy, and he insists that the ‘nothing to hide’ argument is wrong in this article. In the article, “Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’”, Daniel J. Solove uses ethos, pathos, and logos effectively by using strong sources, using
After attacks of September 11, 2001 the nation’s top priority is to defend its citizen from the terrorist using all information in the area. On that day many people died because a terrorist planed that crash, once that first plane crashed hundreds of people died and now hundreds are trapped, then the second plane crashed the other building causing millions people to die and many people trapped. We had over 400 firefighters and police there trying to help and trying to keep everyone clam. Every since this has happened, this is why the government has done this. Luckily it did because then they could track that guy down and send him to jail.
The “Nothing-to-Hide Argument” Analyzed: In this rhetorical analysis, I will be taking a look at Daniel J. Solove’s essay “The Nothing-to-Hide Argument,” which is about privacy in the context of personal information and government data collection (Solove 734). Solove’s main argument in his essay is that the general public has a narrow perception of what privacy really is. The purpose behind his main argument is to expose the problems with the nothing-to-hide argument while presenting a way to challenge it for his target audience, government officials. Solove’s argument to his target audience is effective through his exemplary use of substance, organization, and style in his essay.
The recent revelations about the NSA surveillance programme have cause concern and outrage by citizens and politicians across the world. What has been missing, though, is any extended discussion of why the government wants the surveillance and on what basis is it authorised. For many commentators surveillance is wrong and it cannot be justified. Some commentators have argued that surveillance is intrinsic to the nature of government and its ability to deliver the public good.[1] Few, though have looked at the surveillance within a wider context to understand how it developed. A notable exception is the work by Steven Aftergood.
Civil liberties are rights guaranteed to citizens in the Constitution that the government cannot interfere with, however, in the name of national security, they do. The government sometimes finds it necessary for Americans to give up some of their basic rights to keep the nation protected, but many people find this unnecessary. A law-abiding citizen’s extremely personal information should not be essential to finding terroristic threats within this society. Under no circumstances should an American citizen’s civil liberties be violated in a time of war or crisis, because those are assured rights that are most valuable to their freedom during national conflicts.
The United States spends more on its defense than any other country in the world, in a democratic state whose constitution Alexander Hamilton helped to inspire. It’s questionable as to what lengths a democratic system should go to keep its citizens safe as ultimately security cannot be unconditionally guaranteed. Having a debate between liberty and security is by no means a new one, its influence on political thought can be profoundly polarizing, as the extremes of both liberty and security can be witnessed around the world and throughout history. The principles that must be prioritized within a democracy while still affording safety, revolves around the ability of citizens to exercise their political liberties.
It helps protect the people that cannot or do not know how to protect
Surveillance is becoming increasingly integrated into human lives. Seemingly inconsequential minutiae like how long one spends in line at a grocery store or how many times a headline is clicked on a social media site are collected automatically by both public and private institutions. Whatever we do and wherever we go, there is likely some trace of it. This has led to great debates about the right to privacy, how much surveillance is too much, and under what circumstances surveillance is justifiable. Film and Television play important roles in these debates and in the way in which the public conceptualizes the utility and threat of surveillance more generally.
In the Constitution of the United States entrench a requirement and action to have a profession, which ensure the protection and safety of the Nation and State, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, …, provide for the common defence” . Basically, this statement is the presumption, that part of society gain a mandate to render an essential obligation to the Nation in a specific area, in particular case this is a defence. In order to fulfill stated obligation, part of society must have the necessary knowledge and skills. Next, they have to ensure and gain public trust and autonomy in their action. Finally, set high moral standards that reflect the values of society.
Government Surveillance vs Privacy Spying is nothing new to the world. History books tell us that ancient civilizations like the Roman Empire, Egypt, China, India, and so on used it. On top of that, 1900s regimes like the Former Soviet Union and Nazi’s Germany used spying tactics around the world wars. The main use of spying at that time mostly was for political and military advantage. These countries were successful on spying.
The balance between national security and the rights of American citizens was forged in 1791 with The Fourth Amendment. This was implemented to enforce the notion that “each man’s home is his castle” and to protect “the people” from warrantless searches and seizures