Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Relevant case of the fourth amendment
Relevant case of the fourth amendment
The 4th amendment explained
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Relevant case of the fourth amendment
"The uncensored, tantalizing, wondrous mind of the Internet shall be observed carefully. It is not so much about removing our privacy, it is about preserving our safety. Not having the government monitor search engines and ambitious websites is the error. With the constant threats of terrorism and our fate uncertain with the rise of murder rates and crime, we cannot afford not have them keep the Internet under surveillance.
However, one may argue that having the web linked with continuous observation, strips away the right to privacy. For example, 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(...)”. This amendment protects one’s right to privacy and against
…show more content…
A person may believe having the government oversee internet content is unconstitutional, because it contradicts this amendment seen in The Constitution of the United States, but in all honesty, it does not. By doing this, government officials and law enforcement could stop crime before it occurs; protecting the lives of Americans. For instance, it was 2008 in the sun-filled city of Orlando, Florida. A woman named Casey Anthony, had a daughter named Cayley Anthony, she was two years old. She was later found murdered, and prosecutors believed she had been suffocated to death, but the cause of death was never truly concluded. Casey Anthony went on trial, but she was found not guilty in the year of 2011. However, in 2012, detectives on the case realized they overlooked Casey’s web search for “ fool proof suffocation”, and that she clicked on an article about suicide, taking poison, and placing a bag over one’s head. No one really knew if it was Casey searching for those specifics on the computer, but the action
The 4th amendment provides citizens protections from unreasonable searches and seizures from law enforcement. Search and seizure cases are governed by the 4th amendment and case law. The United States Supreme Court has crafted exceptions to the 4th amendment where law enforcement would ordinarily need to get a warrant to conduct a search. One of the exceptions to the warrant requirement falls under vehicle stops. Law enforcement can search a vehicle incident to an individual’s arrest if the individual unsecured by the police and is in reaching distance of the passenger compartment. Disjunctive to the first exception a warrantless search can be conducted if there is reasonable belief
The 4th amendment protects people from being searched or having their belongings taken away without any good reason. The 4th amendment was ratified on December 15, 1791. For many years prior to the ratifiation, people were smuggling goods because of the Stamp Act; in response Great Britain passed the writs of assistance so British guards could search someone’s house when they don’t have a good reason to. This amendment gave people the right to privacy. “Our answer to the question of what policy must do before searching a cellphone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple - get a warrant.” This was addressed to officers searching people’s houses and taking things without having a proper reason. I find
It is 1776, the United States had just declared it’s Independence from England and one of those reasons for departing was the requirement to house British soldiers at anytime. After the French and Indian War England felt the need to thousands of soldiers in the colonies and an colonial quartering act was passed in 1765.When the British required the quartering of soldiers in the colonies it had passed in England that quartering of soldiers was not required. This quartering act on the colonies along with overtaxing lead to the start of the Revolution.Once the Americans won the war and had need to draft a constitution for the newly formed country, the exclusion of this requirement had to be added to the Bills of Rights.
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution states that individuals have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and impacts, against absurd searches and seizures, yet the issue close by here is whether this additionally applies to the ventures of open fields and of articles in plain view and whether the fourth correction gives insurance over these also. With a specific end goal to reaffirm the courts' choice on this matter I will be relating their choices in the instances of Oliver v. United States (1984), and California v. Greenwood (1988) which bargain straightforwardly with the inquiry of whether an individual can have sensible desires of protection as accommodated in the fourth correction concerning questions in an open field or in plain view.
The United State of America, established by the Founding Father who lead the American Revolution, accomplished many hardship in order to construct what America is today. As history established America’s future, the suffering the United State encountered through history illustrate America’s ability to identify mistakes and make changes to prevent the predictable. The 2nd Amendment was written by the Founding Father who had their rights to bear arms revoked when they believe rising up to their government was appropriate. The Twentieth Century, American’s are divided on the 2nd Amendment rights, “The right to bear arms.” To understand why the Founding Father written this Amendment, investigating the histories and current measures may help the American people gain a better understanding of gun’s rights in today’s America.
The Constitution of the United States of America protects people’s rights because it limits the power of government against its people. Those rights guaranteed in the Constitution are better known as the Bill of Rights. Within these rights, the Fourth Amendment protects “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable search and seizures […]” (Knetzger & Muraski, 2008). According to the Fourth Amendment, a search warrant must be issued before a search and seizure takes place. However, consent for lawful search is one of the most common exceptions to the search warrant requirement.
In 1787, the Constitution, created by a group of men known as the “Framers”, is the highest law in the United States. At first, the Constitution was not ratify because it did not have a bill of rights which is a list of rights that belong to the people. Therefore to allow changes to the Constitution, the Framers created the amendment process. In 1791, congress proposed twelve changes to the Constitution. Ten of the twelve changes were agreed to by the states and were called “The Bill of Rights.” Some of these rights include the right of free speech, the right to practice your own religion and the right to be silent if you are arrested.
Ever since day one, people have been developing and creating all sorts of new methods and machines to help better everyday life in one way or another. Who can forget the invention of the ever-wondrous telephone? And we can’t forget how innovative and life-changing computers have been. However, while all machines have their positive uses, there can also be many negatives depending on how one uses said machines, wiretapping in on phone conversations, using spyware to quietly survey every keystroke and click one makes, and many other methods of unwanted snooping have arisen. As a result, laws have been made to make sure these negative uses are not taken advantage of by anyone. But because of how often technology changes, how can it be known that the laws made so long ago can still uphold proper justice? With the laws that are in place now, it’s a constant struggle to balance security with privacy. Privacy laws should be revised completely in order to create a better happy medium between security and privacy. A common misconception of most is that a happy medium of privacy and security is impossible to achieve. However, as well-said by Daniel Solove, “Protecting privacy doesn’t need to mean scuttling a security measure. 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 Government-federal, state, and local-have the duty to monitor internet to a moderate extent in the U.S. because there is no law regulating to visualize other people's personal content or data. There are even protection laws that citizens use to advertise certain contents on the internet including other people's private email accounts.
However, government agencies, especially in America, continue to lobby for increased surveillance capabilities, particularly as technologies change and move in the direction of social media. Communications surveillance has extended to Internet and digital communications. law enforcement agencies, like the NSA, have required internet providers and telecommunications companies to monitor users’ traffic. Many of these activities are performed under ambiguous legal basis and remain unknown to the general public, although the media’s recent preoccupation with these surveillance and privacy issues is a setting a trending agenda.
As can be seen, from the information presented, the need for laws and restrictions concerning internet data collection is greatly needed. Moreover, the government can search private citizens data without warrant or cause. Also, companies are not only collecting internet user data but also selling it. The companies and agencies who commit such crimes should be fined or either closed down. In closing, the privacy and security of individuals on the internet should be upheld by the United States government.
As technology progresses since the time of the application of the Constitution in 1787, the government is naturally going to run into unprecedented circumstances because of the invention of entities that have never existed before. This means that they have no formal decisions to base their actions on. One such unprecedented circumstance is the use of the internet by millions of Americans. Being that all of your internet content is kept track of and saved in a way that an organization with a lot of power (such as the government) could potentially monitor you, it seems inevitable that controversies may arise with respect to internet monitoring. I firmly believe in a hands-off attitude towards internet content and control. It has been understood for a couple
"Should the government have the absolute power to both see what I research and create on the internet? The following question has been under the spotlight of debate for quite some time. Through the examination present day predicaments, I will build a case for why the government should have absolute power.
Although the Internet is a wonderful place to shop, explore and interact with other people we should always keep our guard up to protect our privacy. Privacy on the Internet is very important to anyone who uses the Internet and even for someone who has never been on line before. Most people do not realize how important Internet is in everyday life. Within most of our lifetimes the Internet has grown from an obscure military project to the greatest revolution since the Industrial Revolution. Computers have gone from machines that took up large rooms to be involved in almost every aspect of our daily lives, from the coffeepot the brews our coffee in the morning, to the car that we drive to work, to the sophisticated computer that we have our desk, computers are everywhere.
"In an increasingly digital world, we must contend the question of what role the government at all levels must play in monitoring the internet. The beauty of the internet is the freedom it affords, and because of this freedom, it has given rise to major American companies like Apple and Google. According to Nielsen, the internet was responsible for 68.2 billion dollars of the United States’ GDP in 2010. That’s not even counting countless businesses that rely on the internet to provide goods and perform services, or accounting for growth since then. The internet is becoming more and more important in our modern digital age, and we must confront the question of whether and how the government may monitor content.