Policing power and publics privacy rights.unit 3 ip
American Intercontinental University Tracey Percifield Unit 3 IP June 26, 2011
INTRODUCTIONSince 9/11 many are borderline in saying thegovernment invades our privacy and others feelthat they don’t do enough to protect the people.This has become a narrow line between protectionand privacy of the Forth Amendment. It is withlooking at many different angles of why thefederal government must have leniency in theway they use NSL’s and the way they go aboutgetting a warrantless search.
The Fourth Amendment states that we have theright to be secure in our homes, person, papersand our effects against unlawful searches andseizures (U.S. CONSTITUTION, 2011).Since 9/11 the Federal Government has changedit’s security view related to this amendment toensure the people’s safety and the safety of ourcountry that we live in.
Title III or otherwise known as the OmnibusCrime Control and Safe Street Act of 1968 setrules for wiretapping conversation and that itdoesn’t violate the Fourth Amendment (U.S.Department of Justice, 2010).
Then came the Electronic Communication PrivacyAct of 1986 to include all electronic informationdata transferred by computers (U.S. Departmentof Justice, 2010).The Stored Communication Act has restrictionslimiting if an email hasn’t been open then itcannot be accessed, and if information has beenstored for over 180 days then it’s accessible (U.S.Department of Justice, 2010).
9/11 Commission Act of 2007 implemented andrevised the Intelligence Reform and TerrorismPrevention Act of 2002 allowing Homeland Securitythe proper means against acts of terrorism against ourcountry ( U.S. Department of Justice, 2010).The Patriot Act was initiated by Congress and signedby President Bush in 2001providing rules andestablishing counter measures against domestic andinternational terrorism and providing HomelandSecurity to use NSL’s at anytime and comes with agag order that they don’t have to be notified of theirpresence ( U.S. Department of Justice, 2010).
It is with these Acts of law and the revising of them tonot only meet the people’s need but also serves as ourcountry’s protection against domestic andinternational terrorism and acts of crime.Because of 9/11 and trying to protect our country andsafeguard of Civil Rights Congress and the Presidentshave to give certain agencies the right to be able toaccess our private and personally information. It is afine line between our Civil Rights and at the sametime those same rights have to have exceptions enableto protect us from harm.
Citizens feel at times their Civil Rights areinfringed on and some citizens feel thegovernment doesn’t do enough for us and withthis in mind we have to protect both for acomplete balance and ensuring the citizens aren’tviolated against unreasonable searches andseizures but safe prof our government from beinginvaded.
CONCLUSIONOr Civil Rights are protected by the Constitutionbut the government must amend these rights andchange them from time to time to ensure it keepswithin the boundaries and must permitexceptions to provide safety to our country andacts of terrorism, this is only possible by meetingthe needs of amending.
U.S. Constitution, Initials. (2010, April 7). U.s. fourth amendment[Web log message]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am4.htmlCRS Report for Congress, . (2002, April 18). The us patriot act [Weblog message]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RS21203.pdfCongressional Research Service, . (n.d.). National security letters [Weblog message]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL33320.pdfU.S. Department of Justice, . (2010, April 7). Electronic communicationprivacy act of 1986 [Web log message]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.it.ojp.gov/default.aspx?area=privacy&page=1285U.S. Department of Justice, . (2010, April 7). The storedcommunication act [Web log message]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/ssmanual/03ssma.pdf