To be or not to be? That is the question.

Nathan A. Sales states that the Patriot Act is needed to protect America from terrorists. He also states that there will be some elaborated safeguard measures so the officers are not going to abuse this power. However, when I watched "Enemy of the State" I can't just say that this movie is not going to happen in real life. Someday -hopefully never, someone inside of the government or someone with power will use the tools for their own vain needs.  

"This tool can only be used to investigate international terrorism, not domestic. And it doesn’t apply to Americans, only to temporary visitors like tourists." - Nathan A. Sales

I have some slight dilemma in this statement because what if, just what if, someone inside US and that is a citizen started to work for the terrorists? Because to be honest, we can never trust everyone because everyone has their own needs. The Patriot Act will give us more problems than we already have. Great power comes with great responsibilities. And who define the word "appropriate"? Also, what are the necessary tools that we need to prevent terrorism?

And where will be our privacy go? Just like Susan N. Herman said in her article, "The Patriot Act is jeopardizing the people's values, freedom of speech, association and religion, privacy and dude process." Everything that is being recorded can backfire and ruin everyone. Privacy is the big problem in this law.

It's not that I am fully hating on the Patriot Act, I am just trying to voice my opinion that this topic needed more time and tweaking for it to be okay. There has to be a lot of thinking and debate when it comes to this kind of protection. Yes, we need protection but this protection can be our weakness in the future.