As explained above, the right to privacy is a universally recognized right. NSA surveillance, collection of personal details may be going against the conventional grain of fundamental human rights and freedoms. The recent court rulings on the issue have not quite settled on a single premise. Two rulings of two courts in America have actually arrived at two different decisions citing two distinct reasoning. In Clayman vs Obama, Judge Richard echoed that surveillance and collection of telephony data by NSA without the knowledge of the general public was against the spirit of the constitution of America.
“But what he seeks to keep as private, even in an area accessible to the public may be constitutionally protected” ~ Justice Potter Stewert (Katz vs. United States). Now don’t get me wrong, because at no point am I saying that what DLK was doing was “right”. However, DLK obviously “expected to keep what he was doing as private”. Therefore, the law enforcement should have gotten a search warrant from a judge prior to searching DLK’s home. I believe many of you would argue that the law enforcement didn’t need to get a search warrant in order to search DLK’s house, because DLK could easily destroy the evidence.
2) Berger argues that what happened on August 6, 1945 was "consciously and precisely planned". Highlight, underline, or flag the evidence he uses to support this claim. How does this argument support his larger purpose? Berger supports his claim by stating "The victims are chosen indiscriminately in the hope of producing a shock effect on political decision-making by their government" as well as "The two bombs dropped on Japan were terrorist actions. The calculation was terrorist.
President Bush then signed the Patriot Act into law after receiving permission from the Congress. This allowed the FBI and CIA to further investigate the events and release confidential information about the suspected terrorists with the public. Because of the series of unfortunate events that happened on September 11, nearly
During times of war, it is understandable that the Government will be more apt to protect its people. In the United States, terrorism has become a major concern. This has come to light more recently after the 9/11 attack in 2004. Americans have been told that terrorism is their biggest enemy. Though in the attempts to obtain security, the people of the United States are giving up their freedoms and others are having those same freedoms taken away from them.
Annotated Bibliography Annotated Bibliography “A National Survey of Stress Reactions after the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks.” (2001). Journal of Medicine, 345; 1207-1512. Retrieved from http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/ This article discusses the general perception of the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001. The terrorist attack was the first major catastrophe in the US that was nationally televised, and broadcast through social media in real time. Individuals at the scene experience traumatic stress.
Down with the Patriot Act The Patriot Act is a very controversial law. It allows the government much more room to do as they please. Some of these practices that government officials can do are monitoring phone calls, emails, and going through personal records. They say this will help prevent terrorism, but is losing one’s privacy really worth it? Could there be a better way to prevent terrorism?
Since September 11, 2001, the United States has had many changes to its security and its focus on who is a threat to it. The government created a department called homeland security and its whole purpose is to protect, prevent, and recover from terroristic or any type of threats America is given. As people may have noticed, airports and other things involving the risks of other people’s lives have gotten more difficult to get through. They have introduced new methods to point out if there is any kind of threat whether it be bombs or weapons used to put people in danger. It’s a very serious job that the people that run these checkpoints are very pains taking and very accurate at what they do.
Tony Wallace February 20, 2014 English101-101 Pros and Cons Essay Patriot Act Thesis: The patriot act was introduced and passed also signed as a law in October in 2001 in response of 9/11 attacks. The act gives the government more power to conduct surveillances or searches within the United States. The purpose of the patriot act is to loosen the restrictions on domestic violence and for law enforcement and other agencies. For those that is against the patriot act they see it as the government is spying on them all the time and its taking away there privacy. The pros of the patriot act are that the law updated wiretapping laws to take into account the changing technology of
In an attempt to prepare for and prevent future acts of terror, the government implemented the USA PATRIOT Act on October 26, 2001. This act lessened the restrictions on law enforcement agencies in regards to their gathering of intelligence within the United States. The act also gives law enforcement officers the right to search a home or business without the owner’s or the occupant’s consent or knowledge. The act of making these clear violations of a person’s privacy was highly controversial but approved in the unremitting post 9/11 pursuit of justice. According to The Washington Post, more than 263 government organizations were either created or reorganized following the attacks.