What should a person care about more, the nation or the individual? If an individual wants privacy for their personal life instead of national security, that is providing yourself with less protection. It is said that privacy is one of the cherished freedoms in our democracy. Everyone wants privacy in their life, but privacy can only go so far without having protection. National security is what keeps the United States safe. National security is the building blocks of a country, because without security anyone can take a country or destroy it. Most people want their life private and want only themselves to know what is going on, but if national security means keeping yourself and others around safe, why not choose it instead? When choosing national security or privacy, an individual is choosing themselves or themselves plus everyone around them. Because national security is such a crucial factor in our country, the government must take drastic measures to ensure the security of the nation.
National security laws is a stepping stone in the building of our country. National security agency and the central security service is a high-technology within the United States Department of Defense. The agency has two missions 1.) information assurance 2.) signals intelligence (“National Security Agency”). Information assurance seeks to ensure the security of private information and by signalling intelligence the individual gathers and analyzes secret information. People signalling intelligence are responsible for codes and ciphers. They also handle secret information between the United States and foreign countries. The National Security Agency has a important value while protecting our country, for instance “we will protect na...
... middle of paper ...
....
National security is what keeps a nation growing and prosperous. Without security, people can invade the country and destroy it. By having national security the government can make sure the country is healthy and out of danger. Privacy is valued by every citizen but most know privacy can only protect so much. Privacy isn’t a strong armor of protection for our country. With national security disasters can be averted. The government’s highest priority is keeping the United States safe, so they must do everything in their power to fulfill that duty. The government can look into everyone’s private lives to get information they need, but that is the price a citizen must pay to keep the nation protected from disaster. Privacy is just watching over the individual, but national security can keep the individual and their loved ones protected when disaster strikes.
We all have heard the quote “Life, Liberty, Land, and the Pursuit to Happiness” and that is the promise of a life here in America. As Americans we pride ourselves on these freedoms that allow us to live everyday. We are one of the only countries that have this promise and it is what draws people from all of over the world to come here. Our founding fathers of the United States of America wrote these words, having no idea the impact that they would have for the rest of this countries history. Those words were the foundation for government, and it wasn’t perfect at first but slowly it matured into what we have today, strong and powerful. To other nations America is seen as the World Power, and a somewhat perfect nation to live in. Unfortunately corruption, scandals and controversies have tainted our once golden glow, and other nations are weary of watching their steps. One of the most controversial elements to our government is the NSA. Hidden in the shadows from American and global knowledge is what the NSA is actually doing and watching out for. Only very recently has the NSA been ripped from the shadows and brought to light what exactly is going on inside those walls. They are “spying” on not only America’s personal data, but foreign leaders as well. The NSA says it’s for the safety for everyone against terrorism and attacks. However, it has gone way to far and violates a constitutional right, privacy. The NSA has overstepped their boundaries, and spying doesn’t seem to make a difference in safety.
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.
...merican soil, the question remains as to how much privacy Americans really possess. Yes, security in the person and home is still at the discretion of law enforcement, but how far will the government reach in what seems to be an elaborate effort to gain total control over what the Constitution defines as a free society? This, and many other questions remain unanswered today, but it must be remembered that this is a government of, for, and by the people, not a dictatorship that it has come to be in today’s world.
Our nation seems as if it is in a constant battle between freedom and safety. Freedom and security are two integral parts that keep our nation running smoothly, yet they are often seen conflicting with one another. “Tragedies such as Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombings may invoke feelings of patriotism and a call for unity, but the nation also becomes divided, and vulnerable populations become targets,” (Wootton 1). “After each attack a different group or population would become targets. “The attack on Pearl Harbor notoriously lead to Japanese Americans being imprisoned in internment camps, the attacks on 9/11 sparked hate crimes against those who appeared to be Muslim or Middle Eastern,” (Wootton 1). Often times people wind up taking sides, whether it be for personal freedoms or for national security, and as a nation trying to recover from these disasters we should be leaning on each other for support. Due to these past events the government has launched a series of antiterrorist measures – from ethnic profiling to going through your personal e-mail (Begley 1). Although there are times when personal freedoms are sacrificed for the safety of others, under certain circumstances the government could be doing more harm than good.
...vil rights and losing protection. Protection is more important but unnecessary spying should not be tolerated. “The sad truth is that most Americans have already lost the battle when it comes to keeping personal information absolutely private.”( Lee, M.Dilascio, Tracey M.4).
Many would typically conclude that there is a trade-off between basic liberty and safety. In today's society, technology has been a predominant part of our lives that gives us the freedom to say and speak freely. But when our sense of trust in the liberty we live in is broken it breaks our sense of security. A recent example of this can be seen when the government collects data from our phone calls and text messages. The government claims to collect personal information in an effort to protect ourselves from criminals and terrorists. This idea should be rejected against the masses because our own personal security should not be violated and the liberty to text and say what we want should not be looked into. Liberation is not something we should take for granted. Liberation is a commodity people in history fought for and die for. Liberation is the power to act, speak, right and do as one pleases. Liberation should make us feel secure in a nation that is supposed to protect us and our rights and privacies. When we give someone information to convey our personal information, that's not just a violation are on our personal lives but I freedom of speech. We give the government permission to read what you typed and listen to what we say. We give up our own personal liberties to gain a temporary
Don’t put it on the internet, although I guess some people would! “Don Tapscott can see the future coming ... and works to identify the new concepts we need to understand in a world transformed by the Internet.” (“Don Tapscott” Ted Conferences LLC) Tapscott is an Adjunct Professor of Management at the Rotman School of Management and the Inaugural Fellow at the Martin Prosperity Institute. In 2013, Tapscott was appointed Chancellor of Trent University. He has written extensively on the topic of information security in the digital age over the past fifteen years. In his essay entitled, “Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy?”(Tapscott p.117). Tapscott considers a new, emerging theory
...he core rights of a citizen given. Violating or exchanging these rights for the nation’s security could lead to more corrupt government officials taking advantage of the American people. National security is the idea that people should be protected from outside dangers and violating people’s liberties defeats the whole purpose of national security.
Privacy is the state of being free from being observed or disturbed by other people.
Privacy is so important to protect because it allows us to make our own decisions. Privacy refers to the right to be left alone. Event though the constitution does not say so directly, it still provides amendments that clarify the privacy and protection that is given to citizens. When it comes to things like Internet privacy, you fight for the rights of everyone, including yourself, even if your choice is to not exercise those rights. The real issue of privacy is that it boils down to everyone not just you as an individual. Not only does a person have the right to their own information, but also they have the right to determine how their information is used and how private or public their personal identity
Privacy is a value we hold close and dear as a society. We do not advertise to others of our weaknesses or our confidential personal interactions. Most of the population does not want to get involved or want to know about other private issues. So privacy can protect the rest of us from being exposed of too much personal information. Autonomy allows us to speak out about injustices and ability for self-expression. The irony is that we feel safest when we know everything about them but they know nothing about you. Here is where a fine line is drawn between privacy and security. Privacy is built from a level of trust. As one’s trust level increases through ongoing relations, the self-guarded privacy begins to fade. When privacy and/ or trust have been compromised then relations are broken and the safe-guards are back in place.
Citizens feeling protected in their own nation is a crucial factor for the development and advancement of that nation. The United States’ government has been able to provide this service for a small tax and for the most part it is money well spent. Due to events leading up to the terrifying attacks on September 11, 2001 and following these attacks, the Unites States’ government has begun enacting certain laws and regulations that ensure the safety of its citizens. From the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 to the most recent National Security Agency scandal, the government has attempted and for the most part succeeded in keeping domestic safety under control. Making sure that the balance between obtaining enough intelligence to protect the safety of the nation and the preservation of basic human rights is not extremely skewed, Congress has set forth requisites in FISA which aim to balance the conflicting goals of privacy and security; but the timeline preceding this act has been anything but honorable for the United States government.
The attacks on American soil that solemn day of September 11, 2001, ignited a quarrel that the grade of singular privacy, need not be given away in the hunt of grander security. The security measures in place were planned to protect our democracy and its liberties yet, they are merely eroding the very existence with the start of a socialistic paradigm. Benjamin Franklin (1759), warned more than two centuries ago: “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Implementing security measures comes at a cost both economically and socially. Government bureaucrats can and will utilize information for personal political objectives. The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of what the ‘law is”, causing a lack of circulated rule. The actual leaders with political purposes jeopardize our individual privacy rights, liberties, and freedoms.
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.
2) It is getting ever easier to record anything, or everything, that you see. This opens fascinating possibilities-and alarming ones.”