Argumentative Essay On The Patriot Act

The age of intelligence has grown at an extremely accelerated rate over the past few years in the United States. After the events of September 11, 2001, when the terrorist group Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade Centers in New York, the surge of surveillance of the American public increased drastically. Measures to ensure our national security were put in place directly after the attacks such as the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the passing of the Patriot Act, and the rise of the National Security Agency, or NSA. The purpose of these decisions were to guarantee the safety of the American citizens from any act of terrorism. The products of this idea are something far from what the American citizens expected in terms of safety

The NSA uses its surveillance to eliminate threats of terrorist attacks and to spy on foreign government and their possible threats. However, spying on Americans as well is a violation of constitutional rights.

The NSA or the National Security Agency carries out most of the domestic surveillance in the United States. Before the 9/11 attacks the NSA needed approval from a court, but after the attacks, they were given free reign to copy any data that possibly linked to terrorist activities. This led to many arguments over whether this collection of data was unconstitutional or not. The extent of this surveillance shocked many people; many civil rights advocates thought that this surveillance breached United States citizens’ rights. Because of the threat of domestic surveillance in the United States it should be decreased drastically but not entirely stopped.

"I can 't in good conscience allow the U.S. government to destroy privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they 're secretly building" (Edward Snowden). The NSA began monitoring and collecting sensitive and personal information from Americans such as their emails, phone calls, photos and other private material. Massive surveillance began in 2001 after the terrorist attack in New York and since then there has been a big peak in government watching. It 's unnecessary for the NSA to monitor American’s private conversations as well as other sensitive data because people should be able to have a sense of privacy in personal communication with others.

The government needs to do its civil duty of protecting the American citizens by most any means necessary under good conscious and reasoning. The Patriot Act has already saved thousands of lives by simple things that will go unnoticed such as simple communication between branches of the FBI. While some may say this act is an invasion of privacy the majority of the population would choose life over a simple communication with a work colleague. If the government repeals the Patriot Act many innocent lives could be taken by terrorist attacks that could have been stopped by communication or gut feeling. Life is a precious thing that America deserves and will receive through the protection of The Patriot

The far-reaching powers of the Patriot Act has substantially empowered our law enforcement agencies and allowed them to apprehend many offenders who otherwise would have gotten away with their crimes. Despite it being contradictious to the fourth amendment of the US constitution, it is not only helping prevent disastrous events in our nation but also equally instrumental in protecting American lives and defending civil liberties. After the endorsement of the Patriot Act, the tools and power it provided to our law enforcement agencies has enhanced our domestic security. This act tore down the legal and bureaucratic walls that would otherwise keep the law enforcement agencies from being able to share vital information freely about the terrorist’s

US News reports the FISA and USA Patriot Act as a "privacy scandal" (Fox, 2013). NPR News reports the concern of "civil liberty[ies] groups" protesting the USA Patriot Act and the concern for the authorities to demand business records from various companies (Johnson, 2011, p.1). What the media fails to convey to the general public is the intent of these Acts is to combat terrorism and not to invade privacy. Millions of people travel the world every day snapping photos from their digital cameras and iPhones. Perhaps to capture a memory or an unusual event, and sometimes other people in the background. Are random photographs an invasion of privacy? The point is intelligence collectors are not interested in the daily communications of millions of citizens--they are interested in collecting information on terrorist and criminal activity. If this is the price we have to pay in order to make our country a safer place to live, then people shouldn 't complain. If the alternative is another attack like 9//11, maybe the anti-USA Patriot activists might think twice about their civil liberties. However, the Government is now considering changes to appease the

The terrorist attacks on our country that occurred on September 11, 2001 were, without a doubt, the most horrific and deadly in our history. In the aftermath of these attacks, the United States Congress moved quickly to pass legislation that untied the hands of law enforcement in an effort to make investigating terrorist organizations easier. On October 26, 2001, a mere 45 days after the 9/11 tragedy, Congress passed the USAPATRIOT (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) Act. The overall purpose of the USA PATRIOT Act was: “To deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes

Though the NSA has economically benefited the United States by helping the prevention of attacks by the terrorist, giving fund towards the government and use of programs, and also the prevention of others hacking and taking over the system, it is believed that it is best if the NSA just does not continue any further. With the continuation of the NSA it can cost more taxes to be removed and invading our privacy which is against our rights in the constitution which states, “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” We can solve the problem of the NSA invasion by shutting down their programs causing them to not invade our privacy and use money which could be used for many other

The wiretapping program is used to collect data that is transmitted on a network and allows the government to eavesdrop without a warrant. The use of this program is easy for the NSA to snoop and allows the government to eavesdrop without having to present a warrant. President George W. Bush had addressed this program as a crucial part to the National Security Agency, yet this announcement led to the wild growth of the NSA’s power. The NSA took advantage of the program and used it to spy on the conversations between foreign nationals, U.S. citizens, and international communications. However, curious of the program and questioning President Bush’s speech, a group from the U.S. senate decided to look into the situation. “The Department of Justice closed the investigation due to the inability of getting certified security clearance required to investigate more of the legal implications of the

Tragedy is the great unifier, but it is also a great opportunity for manipulation. In attempting to create a sense of peace and togetherness Obama has unwittingly planted the seeds for censorship and social stagnation in America.

The fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by a probable cause, which means that the NSA can 't search your messages,calls,search history, or data unless they have a reason that is lawful and approved by a judge.But in most cases they don 't have it approved.

In 2001, the Bush Administration authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to launch a wiretapping program which congress ratified and expanded. This new wiretapping program gave the NSA power to monitor Americans international phone calls and emails without the need of a warrant. The new program goes against an act that was passed in the 1960’s and 70’s. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). This act, which was enacted by congress, regulated the NSA conduct of intelligent surveillance inside the United States and generally required the NSA to seek warrants before monitoring American’s communications. After bush passed the new law in 2008 many lawyers, labor rights activists, human rights activists, legal and media organizations

"  In our World, threats to our Country are common and are becoming frequent. Issues like bullying, extremism, terrorism, and even the illegal production and distribution of drugs threaten all parts of the world more than ever. Not to mention, our increasing dependence on technology for business transactions, work, school, and storage of information has opened up a medium to effectuate these actions. The use of the internet no doubt is beneficial but like anything else, it can, and has been put to ill use. Controversy has been stirred up concerning the monitoring of internet content by the government. Many believe that this action is violating their right inscribed in the fifth amendment which protects against self-incrimination, which in turn protects the privacy of personal information. But with the existence of agencies such as the NSA and Acts like the USA PATRIOT Act, the government has shown that it is more concerned with the national

With the advancement of surveillance technology, many citizens feel that their privacy rights have been violated due to homeland security and the threat of terrorism. Throughout history our government has implemented domestic and international surveillance as a way to safeguard our society from other countries. Now the question that seems to arise within our society is if the government is infringing on our civil liberties? Or is this indeed protecting our nation from imminent danger?