Researcherrr

Government surveillance has gone too far, the American People’s privacy is no longer protected like it was supposed to be. The Fourth Amendment protects everybody’s right to privacy, or at least it is supposed to. Government agencies such as the NSA have way too much freedom on how they collect information or how much information they collect. They are able to do whatever they want with it too, “even if there were strict restrictions against viewing the information that was collected through “espionage” or any sort of illegal collection of information, it would not matter. If there were restrictions than the NSA would have to investigate in order to prosecute people, and through this investigation they would have access to the information and so it would be pointless”(Stallman). There is not much to be done about the information that has already been collected, regardless of how much it is. “The state’s surveillance staff will misuse the data for personal reasons too. Some NSA agents use U.S. surveillance systems to track their lovers- past, present, or wished-for- in a practice called “LoveINT.” “(Stallman). This is the worrying part about all of this mess; NSA agents can track anything about you as if you were a threat to the country, but simply because they want to.

Before the argument against excessive government surveillance is made, it is important to remember that it is excessive surveillance that is the problem. The government being able to monitor the American people is not a bad thing when done correctly. “For the state to find criminals, it needs to be able to investigate specific crimes, or specific suspected planned crimes, under a court order. With the internet, the power to tap phone conversations would naturally extend to the power to tap internet connections. This power is easy to abuse for political reasons, but it is also necessary. Fortunately, this won’t make it possible to find whistleblowers after the fact”(Stallman). The government invades personal privacy rights, but it is also important to note that “Corporations are not people, and are not entitled to human rights”(Stallman). The government uses this as an excuse to monitor entire corporations, instead of individual people. The excess surveillance of the American people is wrong, but some is necessary.

“The description of a world without any rights to privacy would be close to that of the dystopia described in George Orwell’s “1984”.”(Nocera). The government would have total access to everyone’s personal business and it would create a very uncomfortable position for everybody. We also give up a lot of freedom. “… if citizens don’t have basic privacies- firm protections against the search and seizure of your private communications… , Americans will become careful about what they say that can be misunderstood and misinterpreted, and then too careful about what they say that can be understood. The inevitable end of surveillance is self-censorship”(Noonan). Not only do Americans lose their rights to privacy, but surveillance itself will come to an end, according to Peggy Noonan. So if the government really does want to be able to collect whatever information they want, (in a completely legal manor that doesn’t involve how they already do it) than abolishing privacy altogether is not the correct action. It is important to think about how much worse the problem could be, and where it could be leading to, as it could be an important factor in the argument that surveillance in America is in excess and it is in violation of peoples’ human rights.

            Finally, “the government now has access to phone conversations, text messages, e-mail, pretty much anything that Americans use to communicate with one another that is electronic, the government is able to access”(ACLU). This alone is not a problem, it is good for the government to be able to closely monitor persons of interest, but not whoever they please. Recent discoveries such as the information that the former NSA analyst Edward Snowden has revealed has brought to light how much the government actually watches people, most of which pose no threat to the country. There should be some sort of Democratic Process to determine whether it is necessary to collect information about a certain person, or to monitor that person or group of people. Without some sort of regulation on who the government is allowed to monitor the excessive collection of information of innocent citizens will continue, and it is bad because it violates the right to privacy that every American citizen is given in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.

In conclusion, the excess surveillance of citizens that pose no direct threat to the security of the country is wrong and is happening too much in the country. It violates the Fourth Amendment that gives American citizens a right to privacy. People that mean the country harm have forfeited all of the rights that they are given by the countries legislation, therefore it is not a violation of anything to monitor those citizens as closely as possible in order to provide for the protection of the country. However, right now the NSA and agencies like it are able to collect whatever information they want about anybody and it is very difficult to place restrictions on them because it is difficult to determine whether someone is a threat to the country. But there are cases that involve excess surveillance of people that pose no threat to the country at all, that is the real problem.

Works Cited

Nocera, Joe. "A World Without Privacy." The New York Times. The New York Times, 31 Dec. 2007. Web. 12 Nov. 2013.

Noonan, Peggy. "What We Lose If We Give up Privacy." WSJ 13 Aug. 2013: n. pag. 
     Print. 

"Privacy in America." American Civil Liberties Union. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Nov. 
     2013. <https://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/ 
     privacy-america-computers-phones-privacy>. 

Stallman, Richard. "Stallman: How Much Surveillance Can Democracy Withstand?" Wired.com. Conde Nast Digital, 12 Oct. 0013. Web. 12 Nov. 2013.