Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Pros and cons of government surveillance
Ethical aspects of electronic surveillance
Ethics of surveillance essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Pros and cons of government surveillance
Domestic Surveillance
Elizabeth Mahan
SOC 120 Introduction to Ethics & Social Responsibility
Instructor: Cari Lynn Beecham-Bautista
June 29, 2015
DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE
Introduction
Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines domestic as “relating to or made in your own country”. The word surveillance is defined as “the act of carefully watching someone or something, especially in order to prevent or detect a crime”. Therefore, the term Domestic Surveillance in its simplest terms can be defined as the government’s ability to protect its interest by monitoring its residents. In this paper we will review the pros and cons of domestic surveillance as well as review the classical ethical theories. While some may agree with domestic surveillance others believe that it is unconstitutional and the government should not be allowed to use electronics to monitor its residents.
Domestic Surveillance
There have been classical
Giving the examples of theories and perspectives enables a person to reflect and evaluate pros and cons of domestic surveillance or any situation rather it be political or personal. Although reviewing ethical theories gives us a clear reason as to why such a monitoring is done, this does not mean a definitive resolve exists. Therefore, there is the unfortunate fact that with any theory there will have to be a tradeoff between a certain level of privacy and a strong sense of domestic security.
References
Geenwald, G. (2013). NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers. The Guardian, 4. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary Mosser, K. (2013). Ethics and social responsibility (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.
Review, H. L. (2014). Data Mining, Dog Sniffs, and the Fourth Amendment. Harvard Law Review, 691-712.
Wright, M. (2013). The Lone wold is no mean thing. The
Today, electronic surveillance remains one of the most effective tools the United States has to protect against foreign powers and groups seeking to inflict harm on the nation, but it does not go without a few possessing a few negative aspects either. Electronic surveillance of foreign intelligence has likely saved the lives of many innocent people through prevention of potential acts of aggression towards the United States. There are many pros to the actions authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) pertaining to electronic surveillance, but there are also cons. Looking at both the pros and cons of electronic surveillance is important in understanding the overall effectiveness of FISA. [1]
According to a recent article by Scott Shane, “The U.S. is pushing to make sure that cyber programs comply with international law and international standards.” This quote shows that the government wants to make sure that cyber programs protect the citizens to the same degree as other international laws. The government wants cyber programs to have the same standards as international law and international standards to give citizens the sense of security that they are being protected. According to a recent article by David Francis “...Congress retroactively immunized the nation’s telecom giants for their participation in the illegal Bush spying programs, Klein’s claims (by design) were prevented from being adjudicated in court.” This quote means that telecom giants such as Verizon and AT&T participated in Domestic Surveillance in order to help protect citizens. Telecom giants play a role in giving US citizens a sense of security by helping the National Security Agency. Others may believe that the tracking of our phone calls does not give US citizens a sense of security; however, according to a recent article by Marshall Honorof, “Counterterrorism is not the only function of the NSA's widespread surveillance. Although it cannot report exact numbers, Lewis theorizes that the data-mining has allowed the NSA to put a stop to a number of international espionage plots.”
The NSA is a U.S. intelligence agency responsible for providing the government with information on inner and foreign affairs, particularly for the prevention of terrorism and crime. The NSA maintains several database networks in which they receive private information on American citizens. The agency has access to phone calls, emails, photos, recordings, and backgrounds of practically all people residing in the United States. Started in 1952 by President Harry Truman, the NSA is tasked with the global monitoring and surveillance of targeted individuals in American territory. As part of the growing practice of mass surveillance in the United States, the agency collects and stores all phone records of all American citizens. People argue that this collected information is very intrusive, and the NSA may find something personal that someone may not have wanted anyone to know. While this intrusion's main purpose is to avoid events of terrorism, recent information leaks by Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, show that the agency may actually be infringing upon the rights of the American citizen. Whether people like it or not, it seems that the NSA will continue to spy on the people of the United States in an attempt to avert acts of terrorism. Although there are many pros and cons to this surveillance of American citizens, the agency is ultimately just doing its job to protect the lives of the people. Unless a person is actually planning on committing a major crime, there is no real reason for citizens to worry about the NSA and it's invasion of our privacy. The agency is not out to look for embarrassing information about its citizens, rather, only searches for and analyzes information which may lead to the identification of a targe...
The NSA and U.S. government sifting through our private information is but a small inconvenience that we must sacrifice in order to protect our own freedom and safety. Domestic Surveillance roots back to the 1910’s, where the assassination of President McKinley, created a Bureau of Investigation that would trace the efforts of the Communists attempting an uprising in America. This would be the foundings behind Domestic Surveillance in America, and would continue on after World War II where the government created the NSA and CIA, with the main purposes
(Whitehead). The NSA has collected masses of raw data from the web throughout the years, data like phone conversations, emails, and other kinds of communications with the consent of the American people. This kind of data collection clearly violates the privacy principles. After the devastating terrorist attacks on 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bomber, the American people are trading their liberty and freedom and basic human rights, for a phantom of so-called safety.
"NSA Surveillance Programs." Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 14 Oct. 2013. Web. 20 Nov. 2013. .
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
The breath-taking expansion of police power that the United States government took after 9/11 now poses as a troubling issue. Americans need to address the issues of government surveillance because it affects t...
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.
That’s My Tracker.”, written by Peter Maass and Megha Rajagopalan, indicates that the, “...tracking device that happens to make calls...” are exploiting our identities far more than we know (Maass and Rajagopalan,P.129). It was shared that cellphone carriers disclosed and “...responded 1.3 million times last year to law enforcement requests for call data...” without warrants (Maass and Rajagopalan,P.129). These reporters enlighten that all the “explosion of GPS technology and smartphone apps...” as well as “...frictionless sharing...”or “...surveillance has caught our attention so much so that it blinded us from the ugly truth (Maass and Rajagopalan,P.129). In actuality, modern technology such as cellphones and surveillance cameras allow the government to know of it 's citizens location, conversations, and actions—“...treasured by police departments and online advertisers...”(Maass and Rajagopalan,P.130). The mania of technology and “...these invasive services have proved irresistible to consumers…” writes Paul Ohm (Maass and Rajagopalan,P.129). He states that the overly advertised technology is like a magnet to consumers because it continues to be bought and sold regardless of the facts
Privacy is not just a fundamental right, it is also important to maintain a truly democratic society where all citizens are able to exist with relative comfort. Therefore, “[Monitoring citizens without their knowledge] is a major threat to democracies all around the world.” (William Binney.) This is a logical opinion because without freedom of expression and privacy, every dictatorship in history has implemented some form of surveillance upon its citizens as a method of control.
The past decade has seen a proliferation of law enforcement security cameras in public areas, with central London having more cameras than any other city. In cities like New York, Los Angeles, and central London, cameras can be found at almost every intersection. Terrorist attacks have been a major basis for this significant increase in law enforcement security cameras; however, privacy advocates, along with many of the public, feel that it’s an invasion of privacy. People are concerned that all this video surveillance, which is continuously expanding, has created a “Big Brother” society, where people are constantly watched. This creates paranoia and unease for people that just want to go about living there private lives, without feeling that their every move is being watched. The increased presence of surveillance cameras is almost compared to George Orwell’s novel from 1984, where he imagined a future in which people would be monitored and controlled by the government. One question that needs to be asked is: does the benefits of law enforcement security cameras outweigh the negative sides to it? Although the invasion of privacy is a serious argument against law enforcement cameras; nevertheless, it should be seen as a valuable tool to help fight crime. As long as surveillance cameras are in public places and not in people's homes, privacy advocates should not be concerned.
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. ...