What is Telephone Tapping? You may be asking this to yourself right now. Telephone tapping is “the monitoring of telephone and Internet conversations by a third party, often by covert means. The wiretap received its name because, historically, the monitoring connection was an actual electrical tap on the telephone line” according to Google's definition, used from Wikipedia. Where did it all start? Phone tapping was started in the 1890’s, along with the telephone recorder. It was originally intended for international defense, not to invade in privacy. In 1967, the Supreme Court decided in order to tap a phone, a warrant is required. A few years later, a law was passed that allowed the use of telephone tapping for criminal related investigations. Little less than 30 years later, Congress approved the “Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act”, which “requires telephone companies to be able to install more effective wiretaps”. In 2005, President Bush admitted to going against the fourth amendment and illegally “tapped phones”. He also claimed that it was necessary to keep america safe from terrorism and could help with the investigation of the attack of the twin towers on 9/11. Yet, the general population didn’t know about this until it was brought to attention by the NSA.
Now, phone tapping is supposedly secure and mostly banned and or controlled in most countries, especially democracies. But that doesn’t mean that we’re not being lied to, which our government has done before. It’s believed by many people that phone tapping isn’t a good thing whatsoever, because they feel like they are being stalked, or spied on. Now can you blame them for feeling this way? You very likely would feel this way too. And...
... middle of paper ...
..., from the online website, ebscohost.com. Though before I learned this information, I didn’t like this idea of phone tapping one bit. Now that I have facts that support theories and actual happenings with the president etc. has just made my belief that phone tapping is pretty much no good for anyone, except for the times when people are trying to be protected, but still even in that case, it’s just not the best idea. The government always tries to make cover-ups for everything and I think everybody that knows about these lies are pretty sick of them too, and I especially dont think its right that they can just tap into any mobile device quite easily, and find out the truth about anyone, and including personal information that they have no right knowing about. I hope this essay has changed your opinion if you hadn’t already had a bad one about phone tapping.
The previous court sided with the FBI, and claimed that because there was no physical intrusion into the phone booth itself, Katz rights had not been violated. The Supreme Court came to the decision that the FBI did violate Katz’s fourth amendment rights. Their reasoning was that anyone who steps into a phone booth, closes the door, and deposits the payment for the call, has a reasonable expectation of privacy. The phone booth user should not be worried that their conversation would be broadcast to the
Presidential power has increased all the time. Compared to the first U.S. president George Washington, the modern presidency has more power and departments (Patterson, 2014). The expansion of presidential power increases the ability of the Executive branch to regulate and protect our society. On the other hand, the president may abuse his presidential power. Like in this case, the President Nixon monitored his staff’s conversation at the Oval Office, and he let some people to set up the recording device in the Watergate complex (“teachingamericanhistory.org”, n.d.). In my opinion, the president Nixon abused his presidential power to set up these recording devices. Even though he had the excuse that the conversations he recorded may contain the national security issue, the method that he get information was not appropriate. He cannot just record everything without other people’s permission to achieve his goal. These recording conversations might have other people’s privacy. Even though the U.S. constitution does not state the word privacy, it can be derived from the Bill of Rights (Patterson, 2014). The people’s privacy is protected now, and any other person cannot invade their privacy without permission. Therefore, the president Nixon violates other people’s privacy, which was against the Constitution. Because the Constitution is the Supreme law of the U.S., the President Nixon had to follow it (Patterson, 2014). Thus, when the presidential power conflicts with the Constitution, anyone in Executive branch should obey the
“There are about 3 billion phone calls made within the USA every day” (Romano). Now picture you’re calling your friend on the phone. Sometimes we can take small privilege like this for granted. Now imagine that the government is listening to every single phone conversation that we make. Why wouldn’t this scare you? I know it terrifies me. Wiretaps are a problem that concerns every single person in the country. But it isn’t just wiretaps; with a program called Prism the NSA has obtained direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple, and other US internet giants (Glenn). Everything we search for on Google, every message sent or received on Facebook, every item purchased on Apple is all seen by the NSA. The government is overusing their power to spy on its citizens and it needs to stop.
The people’s apprehensiveness does not come from the government’s ability to monitor their phone calls. It is the idea that they are listening to their individual conversations. The government needs to communicate to its citizens on the capabilities of the program. Most of the information on the limits of PRISM has come from the data leaks of Edward Snowden. The common consensus is that the government is able to access information by merely advising a meeting with a judge that is not withheld to the public. However, contrary to the popular belief that they are listening to phone calls, they are merely collecting the date and length of each phone call (Stray).
In America we take freedom and privacy for granted, we as people are unable to comprehend how safe our country actually is, especially in today's society. With that being said there is something that we must all understand, in this age of technology if people are not surveillanced it puts everybody else in our country and the country itself at risk. There are aspects of our privacy and life that we have to sacrifice in order to secure the freedom that we do have. The NSA and U.S. government needs access to our private information in order to ensure the safety of our country and citizens.
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.
Lye, L. (2013). Keeping cell phones private. If the police have a good reason to search a phone, then they can get a warrant, Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2013/09/16/warrantless-cell-phone-searches-violate-civil-liberties
In 2005, a New York Times revealed that the N.S.A. was running a warrantless wiretapping program inside the United States. The phone companies were sending information to the NSA headquarters. Many denounced the program as illegal and demanded congressional hearings. Legal experts said that spying on Americans without a
It's the stuff that spy novels are made of and calls to mind popular authors such as Ian Flemming, John LeCarre’, and Tom Clancy. Recent news articles about the National Security Agency’s (NSA) electronic surveillance data-mining programs targeting US citizens are so far-fetched they read like good espionage thrillers. Unfortunately, these recent reports seem to be true based upon information from several whistleblowers including William Binney, Russell Tice and Edward Snowden. These brave individuals, who stepped forward risking their reputations, careers and personal safety, revealed that the NSA has engaged in wiretapping, monitoring, and recording phone calls, emails, text messages, and social media of US citizens. The United States government has been abridging citizens' rights to privacy and violating the fourth amendment of the constitution through these types of covert operations.
In this technology driven era, I question what effect cell phones are having on our lives as American citizens? To investigate this, I read two articles. The first reading was “Mobile Phone Tracking Scrutinized” by Nikki Swartz originally published in the Information Management Journal for March/April 2006, and the second reading was “Reach out and Track Someone” by Terry J. Allen, originally published by In These Times on May 15, 2006. In her article, Swartz questions the legality of using a cell phone’s GPS system as a tracking device in situations when crimes are involved. She argues the potential violation of Fourth Amendment rights and describes loopholes our government avoids when the data is as a surveillance device. In her article, “Reach Out and Track Someone”, Allen shows the conspiracy theorist’s view of cell phone data tracking use. She suggests the government uses of warrantless wiretapping, and argues the communications companies and government have been involved in questionable activities (p1). Swartz and Allen question the government’s practices using cell phone data; Swartz sees the issue as practical is some cases, where Allen sees an overt violation of privacy. Both of the articles brought up two important questions. How do we define our expectation of privacy, and when does the government’s need take precedence, and even violate an individual’s expectation of privacy?
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”)
Cell phone privacy has become quite an issue over the past few years now that cell phone use is prevalent among most of the world. There have been many articles and news stories circling around about how the government is tracking every move on our cell phone. This includes the government and other entities recording our conversations. Many people view this as a violation of privacy because their expressed thoughts and feelings are being recorded and listened to by someone somewhere. Another ethical concern that this brings about is the violation of the privacy protections of the fourth amendment. Law enforcements officials have the right to access personal location data without giving probable cause to the judge (ACLU 1). While this can create an unnerving feeling I believe the government has taken these measures to keep the country safe. If the government can prevent...
On March 10th, 1876, a revolutionary invention was created by Alexander Graham Bell. The telephone was invented to send vibrations from one receiver to another electrically (History.com ‘Speech Transmitted by Telephone’ accessed on March 11, 2014), and due to Alexander Graham Bell accidentally discovering that he could hear the sound of a ‘clock spring twanging’ (Marry Bellis, ‘The History of the Telephone’ accessed on March 11, 2014), that was possible. The invention of the telephone permitted new levels of communication, allowed families connect around the world, and improved military systems, but also served negative consequences, such as breached privacy. If two people wanted to have a conversation, they would have to write letters back and forth, but with the telephone they were able to pick up the receiver, dial the number, and be connected in a matter of minutes. Telephones enabled long-distance communication, which allowed families to converse despite their location. Military officials and soldiers were also able to stay in touch through field telephones as well as keep contact with the president. Although telephones were originally placed in general stores or other major city locations and homes/neighborhoods that were wired (Elon.edu ‘World Changes Due to the Telephone’ accessed on April 2, 2014), telephones became commonly used in homes in the early twentieth century when telephones began to connect internationally.
We can also have a different approach, which will make phone tapping a good thing for the community. The government uses phone tapping to investigate some people in order to keep the safety of the people or the community in a good condition. For example, if the government knew before the incident on 9/11 though the conversation of the terrorist, they would have saved a lot more people who died not knowing that they were targeted.
Privacy is a right granted to all American citizens in the Fourth Amendment which states “people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and lives against unreasonable search and seizures”. Although our founding fathers could have never predicted the technological advancements we have achieved today, it would be logical to assume that a person's internet and phone data would be considered their effects. This would then make actions such as secretive government surveillance illegal because the surveillance is done so without probable cause and would be considered unreasonable search or seizure. Therefore, access to a citizen’s private information should only be provided using probable cause with the knowledge and consent of those who are being investigated.