Pros And Cons Of Government Wiretapping

You greet your friend as you are talking to him on your Samsung Galaxy S7. You have the most casual conversation, but there is one thing neither you nor your friend does not know. The government is hearing every word you say. The NSA (National Security Agency) tracks every single phone call made in the country. Some find it okay; however, others find it an invasion of their privacy. I firmly believe that government phone tapping is lawful and should still exist, because it deters crime, most people are not against it, and it hinders terrorism. Back in 2001, the Patriot Act was passed, saying that the government is allowed to track and access phone records. Those who are against government phone tapping state that the law is unconstitutional, because it violates the Fourth Amendment. According to the law.cornell.edu website, the Fourth Amendment, passed in 1791, says: “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

On debate websites like debate.org, more than half argue no, but according to a December 2015 poll, more than half of the American population found phone tapping as acceptable: 56% to be exact. Besides, other countries support wiretapping too. As a matter of fact, the United Kingdom does more wiretapping than the USA. Countries such as Canada and Australia also wiretap on their citizens as well, proving that the issue at stake is not nationwide, but global. The people in those countries are fine with it, and though the UK does more phone tapping than the NSA, the English are satisfied, believing that it greatly improves their overall security. Here, too, if more than half of our population is for it, why repeal it? Most would be