Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cause and effects of fear in our society essay
How 9/11 affected the world
Impact of the 9/11 attack
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Cause and effects of fear in our society essay
Introduction
The tragedy of 9/11 has heightened the fear of people as well as their concerns over the growing threats like organized crimes and terrorism. It is undeniable that these negative influences accompany the development of the human society. Hence, there is a strong need for us to employ the fruits of technological products to deter these menaces from happening. Western governments have relied substantially on surveillance-oriented security technologies to foster a proactive attitude towards terror and crime (Pavone and Esposti, 2010). However, despite their prospects on the public safety, these advanced types of machinery, in fact, expose civilians to federal monitoring, diminishing their privacy and constraining civil rights. As
…show more content…
Installing surveillance cameras in public places such as shopping malls and libraries would capture the movements of streetwalkers at every moment, leaving little to private spaces. Moreover, it is likely that the personals obtained from monitoring may be manipulated for wicked intentions, primarily political. Hiran (2005) cited the example of the data-aggregation company ChoicePoint revealed that since February 2005, scammers had tricked it into providing them with the private financial records of 163000 people, at least 88 million individual records held by the government or private companies have been exposed to possible theft. “People were getting worried that the government could spy on us anytime and easily control us,” Pavone and Esposti pointed out …show more content…
It has been a long-term unsolved problem that preservation of privacy and personal data is not conveyed within the current legal schemes imposed on the surveillance-oriented practices. Having full access to a vast scale of personals make civilians vulnerable to illegal exploitation. The expansion of databases gives rise to the issue on which a customer could be mistakenly identified as ‘potential suspect,’ leading to its unique treatment and restriction on specific services. Hence, a more organized form of administration and supervision is required to protect the civil rights of
Although they can be easily tracked, people overlook the invasion of privacy possibility because of the convenience they bring to every day life. Systems like OnStar installed in cars have made the tracking of stolen cars practically effortless. Similar tools are being used by law enforcement, Penenberg stated “cell phones have become the digital equivalent of Hansel and Gretel’s bread crumbs” (472). He then goes on to discuss how in Britain in 1996, authorities installed 300 cameras in East London. Although this didn’t affect the terrorism, it did affect the crime rate which fell 30 percent after the cameras were put into place. Penenberg closes his essay by mentioning that the surveillance is not only used to watch the citizens but also for citizens to keep an eye on the government. Through his organization, relevant information, and professional tone, Penenberg creates an effective
The pros of electronic surveillance are extensive. The ability for agents of the United States Intelligence Community (IC) to intercept and process communications and information from foreign powers, agents of foreign powers, international terrorist organizations, and others who seek to engage in activities with such groups, provides the ...
"Security & Surveillance." Center for Democracy & Technology. Center for Democracy & Technology, 2013. Web. 08 Feb. 2014.
The government is always watching to ensure safety of their country, including everything and everyone in it. Camera surveillance has become an accepted and almost expected addition to modern safety and crime prevention (“Where” para 1). Many people willingly give authorization to companies like Google and Facebook to make billions selling their personal preferences, interests, and data. Canada participates with the United States and other countries in monitoring national and even global communications (“Where” para 2). Many question the usefulness of this kind of surveillance (Hier, Let, and Walby 1).However, surveillance, used non-discriminatorily, is, arguably, the key technology to preventing terrorist plots (Eijkman 1). Government surveillance is a rising global controversy; and, although minimal coverage could possibly result in safer communities, too much surveillance will result in the violation of citizen’s privacy.
Whether the U.S. government should strongly keep monitoring U.S. citizens or not still is a long and fierce dispute. Recently, the debate became more brutal when technology, an indispensable tool for modern live, has been used by the law enforcement and national security officials to spy into American people’s domestic.
Andrew Guthrie Ferguson thinks that people should be able to choose what areas they want to be secure from “physical and sense-enhancing invasion.” Another scholar, Joel Reidenbuerg, believes that current views of privacy do not fit well with the current technology, instead surveillance is dependent on “the nature of the acts being surveilled.” One more scholar, Chris Slobogin, believes that “the justification for a search should be roughly proportional to the intrusiveness of the search” (Hartzog, 2015). Point is, legal issues surrounding government surveillance is a complex topic without a perfect all-encompassing solution; each situation is different and should be treated
One of the many details shown is that mass surveillance has not had an apparent impact on the prevention of terrorism (Greenwald, 2013). Most of the information gathered has not been used to impede a terrorist attack. Surveillance does not protect the rights to life, property and so on from being violated by terrorists. However it gives the citizen...
Domestic Surveillance 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.
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.
The world erupted in outrage following revelations by Edward Snowden regarding the extent of surveillance perform by the National Security Agency. Privacy becomes one of the hottest topic of 2013 and was chosen by the world’s most popular online dictionary, Dictionary.com, as the Word of the Year. However, the government is not the only one that conduct data gathering and surveillance. Employers often monitor their employees, and businesses collect data on theirs customer. The morality of these practices is a topic that generates heated debate.
There has always been surveillance of the general public conducted by the United States government, the usual justifications being upholding the security of the nation, weeding out those who intend to bring harm to the nation, and more. But the methods for acquiring such information on citizens of the United States were not very sophisticated many years ago, so the impact of government surveillance was not as great. As a result of many technological advancements today, the methods for acquiring personal information - phone metadata, internet history and more - have become much simpler and sophisticated. Many times, the information acquired from different individuals is done so without their consent or knowledge. The current surveillance of people by the United States government is unethical because it is done so without consent and it infringes on a person’s rights to privacy and personal freedom.
Since the ( infamous ) September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the rising trend of radicalism as well as the “ lone wolf terrorist ” in recent times have brought the dangers of terrorism ever closer to the hearts of our homes and cities. The war on terrorism has changed the stakes in ( fundamental ) ways. No longer are countries fighting against threats ( oceans / miles ) away, instead, the war has come into our homes and onto our streets. In response, both the general public and states have continued to urge as well as seek for a solution that would improve their ability to discover and pre-empt such plots. One of the more controversial suggestions has been that of state surveillance, which would allow states to monitor for suspicious activities, and better identify as well as carry out more accurate investigations on such people-of-interest, allowing them to forestall potential attacks before they can occur.
Consequently, surveillance practises have primarily been used to monitor the suspect, the criminal, the abnormal or even those seen as a threat to those in power. Marx (2002) argues traditional definitions of surveillance (such as the above) are not appropriate to define ‘new’ surveillance, indicating this is due to the rapid change in which surveillance has undergone, facilitated through technological developments. Accordingly, I will identify how contemporary surveillance techniques differ from previous
Public safety covers a wide variety of people and organizations, but carries one common theme and that is, the public’s safety. This course has broadened my knowledge on the many roles that make the public safety sector go around and the role the public plays in it as well. My thoughts before the course were close minded and to the point. I quickly realized that policing is not as cut and dry as I once portrayed it to be. Society is always changing and adapting, and it is the job of the those in public safety to adapt and change with it. The mindset that I grew up with, in rural Saskatchewan, was the police are good people and you will only need to deal with them if you break the law or see someone break the law. My answers in the module 1 survey reflected my upbringing. My first thought for
A security guard works in any building or area that needs protection from theft, fire, vandalism, and illegal entry. For every security guards job it depends on where they live and work. Every security guard has a different task. Some work in airports. If you work in an airport you might have to search travelers for weapons, explosives, or drugs. They may have also check cargo for illegal items. There are security guards that work museums and art galleries. These security guards have to make sure no one steals, damages, or touches artwork or historical artifacts. They also help people if they have questions and bring people to safety in case if there is a fire or an earthquake. In office buildings and factories, security guards have to make