Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on the right to privacy in us
Essays on the right to privacy in us
Essays on the right to privacy in us
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on the right to privacy in us
As American citizens is privacy something we have the right to or is this a privilege that the government can take from us? Most people do not understand the process of how to acquire a wiretapping permit or if the government even needs one to listen to us, most people also think that the government can listen in on us at any time is this true? The government, an employer and the telephone company are the only groups who can legally apply for a wiretap order. A wiretap order is a permit to be able to wiretap peoples phone lines. Does this invade the privacy of the average person? In order to understand wiretapping an individual must understand what communication is, what the federal laws state and why we have these laws, and what the state laws decree.
There are only three forms of communication as far as the government is concerned (that will apply to the wiretapping act). First of these is oral communication, this is concerning face to face confrontations between individuals. This form of interaction requires the authorities to obtain a wiretap order in or for the government to bug your house or have an officer or citizen wear a wire. The second form of communication is wire communication and this is what the average person is most aware of when it comes to wiretapping. This form of interaction can take place through any form of phone line and even through the internet. The authorities do need a wiretap order for them to listen in on what someone is saying. The only exception to this is if you are broadcasting through a radio signal which makes it public a public announcement. The last and final form of communication that the wiretap act concerns to is electronic communication. This form of communication goes by the same guideli...
... middle of paper ...
...rous people and have possible saved the country from many more tragedies similar to 9/11.
Works Cited
Espejo, Roman. Privacy. Detroit: Greenhaven, 2011. Print. Opposing View Points.
"Fact Sheet 9: Wiretapping and Eavesdropping on Telephone Calls." Wiretapping and Eavesdropping on Telephone Calls. Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, Feb. 2014. Web. 01 May 2014.
"Flordia." Reporters Committee For Freedom Of The Press. Reporters Committee For Freedom Of The Press, 1 Aug. 2012. Web. 2 Apr. 2014.
Mullikin, Arwen, and Syed Shawon M. Rahman. "The Ethical Dilemma Of The Usa Government Wiretapping." International Journal of Managing Information Technology 2.4 (2010): 32-39. Print.
"Wiretapping Law Protections | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project." Wiretapping Law Protections | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project. Surveillance Self-Defense, n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2014.
Is the American government trustworthy? Edward Joseph Snowden (2013) released to the United States press* selected information about the surveillance of ordinary citizens by the U.S.A.’s National Security Agency (N.S.A.), and its interconnection to phone and social media companies. The motion picture Citizenfour (2014), shows the original taping of those revelations. Snowden said that some people do nothing about this tracking because they have nothing to hide. He claims that this inverts the model of responsibility. He believes that everyone should encrypt Internet messages and abandon electronic media companies that track personal information and Internet behavior (op.cit, 2014). Snowden also stressed to Lawrence Lessig (2014) the importance of the press and the first amendment (Lessig – Snowden Interview Transcript, [16:28]). These dynamics illustrate Lessig’s (2006) constrain-enable pattern of powers that keep society in check (2006, Code: Version 2.0, p. 122). Consider Lessig’s (2006) question what is “the threat to liberty?” (2006, p. 120). Terrorism is a real threat (Weber, 2013). Surveillance by social media and websites, rather than the government, has the greater negative impact on its users.
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
Roufa, Timothy. "How Dangerous Is a Law Enforcement Career." About.com Criminology Careers. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Mar. 2014.
Richards, Neil M. "The Dangers Of Surveillance." Harvard Law Review 126.7 (2013): 1934-1965. Academic Search Elite. Web. 8 Feb. 2014.
The twenty first century in the century of technology, where technology is heavily used in the people daily lives. One of the field where technology is being utilized in is monitoring people through cameras and phone calls. Although it might be interfering with people privacy, but it has its advantages that might outweigh the disadvantages. This essay will discuss both points of view, and try to decide which one is more reasonable than the other.
It was reassured from the Department of Justice that any searches made under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, data will be used in compliance with guidelines and procedures, and it does not provide a way to get around the requirement of a court order before targeting any U.S. citizen under the FISA. A considerable amount of the NSA's bulk data collection is actually substantiated under section 702. This gives permission for the collection of communications without an individual warrant for each case, as long as there is a reasonable belief that the communications are both foreign and in another nation.
"FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin: A History." FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin 81.12 (2012): 1-2. Academic Search Premier. Web. 30 Mar. 2014.
Micek, John L. “Is your cellphone protected by the 4th Amendment? Maybe not: What do you think?”The Patriot-News. (29 Apr. 2014).Web. 29 Apr. 2014
"State Laws Related to Internet Privacy." State Laws Related to Internet Privacy. N.p., 23 Jan. 2014. Web. 13 Feb. 2014.
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.
One of the hottest topics in privacy is regarding our phone conversation with others. It doesn't take a whole lot these days to be in someone's business, in their conversation, breaking the law of privacy with out spending that much time and money. "…Compared to an average monthly phone bill of seventy dollars, the option to wiretap the average phone line is probably worth less than twelve cents a month to police and spy agencies."1 These days, when information is transferred from one person to another, or from point A to point B, there are more people who are interested in know what they are talking about, not just to know but to benefit something out of it. This is illegal if it is done without the knowledge of the individuals involved. Since people are not giving communication privacy enough attention, it is getting to the point that it is out of control of anybody. Anybody can just get up and get in to others conversation with out their knowledge. This is having a big effect in out community these days. There are a lot of scenarios were people are involved in this situation.
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.
Stanley, Jay. "Accountability vs. Privacy: The ACLU's Recommendations on Police Body Cameras." American Civil Liberties Union. N.p., 09 Oct. 2013. Web. 15 May 2014.
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.