Argumentative Essay On Domestic Surveillance

606 Words3 Pages

I do not believe that the U.S.F.G should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance, due to the fact that by dramatically decreasing monitoring of domestic affairs, the U.S. not only makes itself more vulnerable to social, economic, political, and other domestic issues, but it also makes Homeland Security more vulnerable and significantly weaker in their quest to stop terrorism in the United States and guard our borders. Google's dictionary defines the word, "surveillance" as, "close observation, especially of a suspected spy or criminal". By restricting the government's access to monitor and potentially stop espionage or other criminal activity such as terrorism, corruption, cyber attacks/hacking or even fraud, I believe that …show more content…

By catching a criminal online, the USFG can stop the person from committing an act that would hurt others. By monitoring phone logs, cookies, and other metadata, the police/state can acquire more evidence needed to solve a case or even find a missing person. By monitoring others and taking action when necessary, the US government can help keep people safe, which would entice other countries to follow suit, and probably feel more comfortable when partnering with the U.S. Similar to child care, would you feel secure leaving your child without supervision in a public place? This is what the USFG prevents from happening and is another reason as to why I do not believe that the USFG should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance! Also, why should we be so concerned about privacy if we have nothing to hide? Would you feel uncomfortable knowing your parents are watching you do the right thing and following directions? On the other side, I am sure you wouldn't want to be monitored if you were doing something questionable, so really, why worry about surveillance? In times like these, it seems as though surveillance should be enforced and enhanced, not "substantially curtailed", and that is why I think you shouldn't agree with the affirmative side of this

Open Document