Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Disadvantage of national ID system
Identity crisis conclusion
Themes of identity
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Threat of National ID In William Safire’s “The Threat of National ID”, he argues against a National ID card. Safire published an article in the New York Times to establish different context. Safire gives details about the use of National ID card at different places in different situations. He emphasizes that many Americans are willing to give up personal privacy in return for greater safety, but none of us have privacy regarding where we go and what we do all the time. Safire disputes that mandatory National ID become necessary for people to prevent fear of terror attack. Safire emphasizes his argument around a comparison of a lost dog with a newly developed chip fixed underneath their skin which would let animal shelter alert owner of their pets. He declares that using a chip to find a lost animal would be a good side of technology, whereas fear of terrorism has placed American in threat of trading our right to be let alone for the fake security.
The United States has lived through an age of terrorism and the citizens have come to realize that they would rather ensure the safety of the masses than protect their privacy. Works Cited Cunningham, David. A. "The Patterning of Repression: FBI Counterintelligence and the New Left." Social Forces 82.1 (2003): 209–40. JSTOR.com - "The New York Times" Oxford Journals.
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
A clash that arises when we talk about privacy is the question of what should be given preference - our rights or our safety (which the State claims is taken into consideration and is usually the driving force for the creation of surveillance projects). Those who agree with the State assert that they’ve got nothing to hide and therefore have nothing to worry about . Trent Lott, a former Senate majority leader asked rhetorically whether the reason for
Voter ID laws in the United States have begun to create controversy since the beginning of its adaptations in the early 2000’s. Voter ID laws in the United States is a law that requires U.S. citizens to have a special form of identification in order to vote in an election. The idea with Voter ID laws is that the state must make sure that the laws do not pose any sort of burden on the voters. These laws have been proposed in order to stop voting fraud. However, the institution of Voter ID laws have made trouble in states, including Texas, regarding to the various amount of identification requirements needed.
Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the United States, once said “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In America’s society today, some are willing to sacrifice their civil liberties in order to gain protection and security over some potential threat. Especially after the events of September 11th and several attempted bombings in U.S. cities. This sacrifice of individual freedoms such as the freedom of speech, expression, the right to information, to new technologies, and so forth, for additional protection is more of a loss than a gain. Citizens of the United States deserve equal liberty and safety overall, as someone should not have to give up one value in order to gain another. This concept of individual right goes beyond the simple idea of “individual comfort.” Personal liberties cannot be surrendered and are not to be compromised since these liberties are intangible. Individuals should not have their personal liberties exchanged for national security because individuals are guaranteed protection to these rights.
Many families have had the agonizing experience of losing their beloved pets. Lost dogs, puppies, and cats end up in shelters around the country with no way of contacting an owner. State wide license laws are supposed to aide in returning lost dogs to their owners, but in many cases these laws do not end up working. Many individuals do not follow the law close enough, do not have enough money to pay for a license, or dogs lose their collars or tags. Other families tattoo their dogs, but few shelters make the effort to find such a marking. Identifying microchips implanted just under the skin of a pet are a possible solution to prevent a family pet from being lost forever. There are fewer problems with this microchip identification system in comparison to the traditional laws. One issue is that some of the chips are becoming unable to be read by a shelter without a universal scanner, and shelters do not necessarily have the technology to scan some of the newer chips. Even though there are set backs, the microchips are becoming an increasingly popular technology to aid in locating your lost pet.
Kopper is presenting that our privacy is not being protected. From Patriot Act to our daily use devices like car and phones is making our privacy not secure. Your phone can be your GPS now a day. For example, if you lose a phone then you can track a phone if the location is turned on. Then you can get the exact location of your phone. As he was in support of our privacy not being protected he also gives an example of how our daily use of technology like “VeraChip”. This chip is used in dogs or animal shelter where they can “scan the name and phone number of lost pet owner.” But he argues that same technology can be used in human too. Because chip like that can store amount of data we can see that health care providers can use chip to tap into patient medical records. People have used the many ways to get to your information in which we think its
When you see security guards, cameras, and full body scanners, your safety is not even close to assured in that building or location. Cryptographer and Privacy Specialist, Bruce Schneier, describes this idea as what he calls “Security Theater”. Schneier uses explanation of logical and emotional ideas that factor into our perception of how safe we are. His use of these appeals help him convey his purpose to the audience and effectively show the audience the importance of what Schneier is saying.
Voter Identification (ID) Law, one of the most talked about political issue is in the news again and the focus is now from the Presidents administration: "A pattern of duplicate registrations found nationwide shows voter fraud is both massive and systemic. Yet, the Obama administration claims there is no problem and that demands for voter ID cards are racist" (Investor's Business Daily). American citizen have one of the greatest fundamental rights of the free world, the ability to vote in our democratic system.
The word “privacy” did not grow up with us throughout history, as it was already a cultural concept by our founding fathers. This term was later solidified in the nineteenth century, when the term “privacy” became a legal lexicon as Louis Brandeis (1890), former Supreme Court justice, wrote in a law review article, that, “privacy was the right to be let alone.” As previously mentioned in the introduction, the Supreme Court is the final authority on all issues between Privacy and Security. We started with the concept of our fore fathers that privacy was an agreed upon concept that became written into our legal vernacular. It is being proven that government access to individual information can intimidate the privacy that is at the very center of the association between the government and the population. The moral in...
Most people concerned about the privacy implications of government surveillance aren’t arguing for no[sic] surveillance and absolute privacy. They’d be fine giving up some privacy as long as appropriate controls, limitations, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place. ”(“5 Myths about Privacy”). The fight for privacy rights is by no means a recent conflict.
new advancements such as microchip implant for humans and animals can be very controversial. At first, the implants may seem to have benefits but in the long run they will actually cause more trouble than they are worth. These potential "troublemakers" are about the size of an elongated grain of rice and are injected in the skin under the arm or hand (Feder, Zeller 15). The chip is not powered by battery and there is nothing that can possibly leak out into the body (Posada-Swafford 8). An early form of this technology was used to monitor salmon and has been used for other wildlife research (Verhovek 5). The idea of the chips was started from the September 11 tragedy when the firefighters going into the Twin Towers were "IDing" themselves by writing information on their arm about their blood type, health conditions, and their identity with a permanent marker (Bentley 10). The VeriChip Corporation, which is owned by Applied Digital Solutions, saw this as an opportunity to market their product. As a result of their marketing ploys, Applied Digital claims that so far there have been about 1,000 human recipients of the chip.
On September 11, 2001, the United States was attacked by a group of Islamic terrorists who hijacked four airplanes and carried out three simultaneous suicide attacks against the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. As a result of the multiple crimes, the United States’ government increased national security and prioritized our nation 's’ defense, often at the expense of the people’s privacy, by enacting policies like the Patriot Act (What is the USA Patriot Web 2011). This left personal emails, text messages, internet history, and personal belongings exposed to the government. Although the government reduced the public’s rights to privacy, it is a necessary step to ensure national safety and security.
“To be ourselves causes us to be exiled by many others, yet to comply with what others want causes us to be exiled from ourselves” (Estes). Mahmoud Darwish could relate to this quote on a very serious level. He was exiled from his homeland, but stayed true to himself and his family. Darwish was born in a Palestinian village that was destroyed in the Palestine War. He became involved in political opposition and was imprisoned by the government. He was later forced into exile and became a permanent refugee. Around 1975, Mahmoud wrote a poem titled “Identity Card”. Mahmoud Darwish writes using diction, repetition, and atmosphere to express his emotions towards exile. He expressed his emotions through poetry, especially “Identity Card”.
Along with Privacy and security comes the issue of terrorism, Constitutional rights, and Prisoners of War (POW). The privacy vs security debate has two sides to it. Many think that it has influenced governmental interaction with citizens. Sometimes the law focuses on the wrong interests. Just as security cameras are made for thief’s, there come along violations within a person’s workspace or personal life. Privacy emerged early on including Jewish and Roman laws safeguarding against surveillance. Once populations began to grow citizens around the world started filing complaints about noise and unlawful search and seizures. Security and Privacy become an internationally growing issue that affected the world. Security is known as a sort of Independence from danger. Privacy is a freedom from the Undesirable. “He noticed that the needle on his gas gauge was getting low and decides to pull over. As he walks into the gas station he pays for the gas with his credit card, steals a pack of cigarettes and a newspaper without the clerk knowing. B Horton proceeds out the doors and recognizes a security camera as he walks to his car. Later he is contacted and tried for theft. Some believe the camera was an invasion of his privacy but others say that Horton took from society” Webster 21) In America this was and still is a serious issue. The founders saw it coming and implanted laws against home invasions based on national security or to protect others. The fourth amendment in the Bill of Rights is one plan of action that the founding fathers implemented into the United States Constitution to give people a sense of privacy from law enforcement. Also the Fifth Amendment placed a specific procedure on how police go about arresting an individual. ...