Is the FBI wrong? The FBI recently took Apple to Court! After the most recent attack by Isis the FBI is very concerned. This lead to the FBI trying to force Apple to make a device that could unlock any of their phones. When Apple said ¨no¨ the FBI tried to sue Apple because of this. Apple should not have to comply with anything that the FBI asks in regards of forcing Apple to make a device that invades another's privacy. First of all, if Apple were to do something like this it would take away anyone with one of their phone´s 4th amendment. Both ¨No unreasonable searches” and “ valid warrants¨. Also, as stated in PRO/CON: Was Apple justified in refusing to help the FBI? If Apple were to comply such a thing would bring down their worth …show more content…
For example, ¨Apple phones have features that protect the privacy of information people have on them. The Fourth Amendment guarantees people this right to privacy. Individuals have the right to possess information without having to share it with the government.¨ ( Holcombe ). People’s privacy is important. With the FBI is trying to force Apple to do this is unconstitutional. This is due to the fact that if Apple was to do what the FBI asked the results would invade millions of peoplś privacy, therefore invading the fourth amendment. Admitted there are some times were such a program would come in handy is detrimental to get into someone’s phone. For example “Apple to help the FBI unlock an iPhone belonging to Syed Farook, who was responsible for the shootings in San Bernardino in December which left 14 people dead.” (Kharpal). In this case Apple’s obligation was to the FBI, to help in this investigation to see if this man was part of a bigger organization. With this information the FBI could possibly save hundreds of lives. Nevertheless, everyday people that are not suspected of terrorism or any other crime should not have to be treated as such. The rights of every person are important. The FBI should not try to take away part of every person's 4th amendment. Especially when such is not absolutely
In doing so, they used 3 different logical structures in their arguments: precedent, degree, and analogies. Tim Cook debated with a constructive argument, “to guarantee such a powerful tool isn’t abused and don’t fall into the wrong hands is to never create it” (The Guardian, 2016). This is an example of degree argument, as the audience will automatically agree with any arguments with less of bad things because it is good. Apple knows there are no other cases like this one, so there’s nothing to compare to. Letting the government into the iPhone only this one time can set a dangerous precedent that can potentially force Apple to force open every iPhone in the future at government request. This became a heated legal battle, granting the access in their products for law enforcement was compared to “a political question” by Apple with an analogy (Yadron,
" Various guarantees create zones of privacy. The right of association contained in the penumbra of the First Amendment. The Third Amendment in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers. The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms 'the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures'. The Fifth Amendment in its Self Incrimination Clause.
Privacy comes at a cost. It brings people who fight for the people the privacy of others when it is violated together. Cops not being able to search when they seize a cell phone makes them risk their lives because how people these days are, there could be bombs in the phone. Even though this amendment was ratified, people to this day still don’t have privacy they rightfully deserve. This effects me because I’m able to keep special information to myself. Also, if a police pulls over a family member and ask for their phone to investigate without giving a proper reason or having a warrant, that family member could say no. If a police hasn’t given you a good reason to hand something over, you have the right to resist or else the police are being unconstitutional. This amendment gives people the safety to do what they want(that’s legal). It also makes life better, but harder. Life is harder with this amendment because you have to watch out for who you trust that they won’t do anything to jeopardize your safety. This is relevant because a man in Indiana was tracked down by a GPS. It didn’t violate his 4th Amendment because the police got a warrant to put a tracking device in his mom’s car. This case represents how technology gives advantages and disadvantages. An advantage was that they were able to track him down for a burglary. The disadvantage would be that if they hadn’t gotten a warrant, he could have filed a lawsuit against
According to the Fourth Amendment, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” Without the Fourth Amendment, people would have no rights over their own personal privacy. Police officers could just enter people’s houses and take anything that they could use as evidence and use it against them. With the advancement in today’s technology, it is getting more and more difficult to define what exactly privacy is to us, and whether or not the Fourth Amendment protects it.
It is a common known fact that the Bill of Rights serve as a type of contract between the government and the people that outlines the specific rights that each individual is entailed and the government cannot revoke those rights. The Fourth Amendment protects those accused of a crime by preventing officials from searching the home, property, or body of the accused without a valid reason or a search warrant. Despite being a crucial amendment in terms of the privacy and personal protection of an individual, the history behind the conception of the amendment and the history of the amendment in the modern day is not known to a majority of the American population.
In today 's generation many adults and teenagers keep everything from contacts numbers to their social security numbers on their smartphones. When customers, including criminals and terrorists purchase their smartphones, they are buying it with the assurance that not some, but all of their information and privacy will be safeguarded. The issue occurring today deals with the suspected terrorist of the San Bernardino, California on December 2, 2015 shooting involving over 30 injured people. Syed Farook, the suspected terrorist Apple IPhone is locked with a 4 code password and the government wants Apple to create a backdoor operating systems that allows them to computerize as many passcodes they can to unlocks the terrorists IPhone. Apple strongly believes that creating this necessary backdoor system will create a negative chain of effects that will affect everyone from smartphone users to social media companies and their privacy. The FBI recently has taken Apple to court to create the necessary backdoor operating systems to get around the security features created on the Apple IPhones. Apple has the legal right to refuse creating a “backdoor” software to get into suspected terrorists iphone because it invades the privacy of Apple 's customers, it will set a precedent for other companies, and the FBI will mislead Apple.
Along with the first eight amendments, the 4th Amendment deals with personal freedom. (Encarta Online) The 4th Amendment protects citizens from being accused of a crime without probable cause. Citizens of the United States of America deserves and maintains the right to privacy and security in their own homes.
The First Amendment is crucial in protecting the five fundamental freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, freedom of petition, and freedom of assembly. The Fourth Amendment is significant for it protects the individual’s privacy from the government and from government harassment. The Sixth Amendment is valuable since it provides the legal framework of the criminal legal system and to protect the accused person from abuse of power. Of all the Amendments of the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment are the most
The 4th Amendment is the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
The intent of the Fourth Amendment was to create a constitutional buffer between the people and the intimidating power of the government. There are three components of the Fourth Amendment. First, it establishes the privacy aspect by recognizing that U.S. Citizens have a right to be “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects.” This privacy interest is protected by prohibiting any searches and seizures that are “unreasonable” or have not been authorized by a warrant that is based upon probable cause. And, “the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” must be described with particularity before it is issued to a law enforcement officer.
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...
In this case it’s I think important to understand that Apple would happily open this one phone and give the FBI the info they needed. But this isn’t what the government really wants. The government wants a backdoor key into the operating system itself. This means that government will have total right of entry into your iPhone. This has to be regulated to protect
The privacy of the individual is the most important right. Without privacy, the democratic system that we know would not exist. Privacy is one of the fundamental values on which our country was founded. There are exceptions to privacy rights that are created by the need for defense and security.
Americans’ personal privacy is being to be ruined by the rise of four different types of surveillance system. The four are: federal government agencies; state and local law enforcement entities; telecoms, web sites and Internet “apps” companies; and private data aggregators .The right to privacy is not derived from any source; however the Declaration of Human Rights states that "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor attacks upon his honor or reputation"(Stone 348). The right to protection is also secured by the Privacy Act of 1974 and found through the in the first, fourth and fifth amendments of the United States Constitution.
In September 25, 1789, the First Amendment protects people’s privacy of beliefs without government intrusion. The Fourth Amendment protects one’s person and possessions from unreasonable searches and seizures. On February 1, 1886 in Boyd v. U.S. Supreme Court recognized the protection of privacy interests under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. In the 1890s, the legal concept of pr...