Blog Feed

The argument of whether or not the u.s.a p.a.t.r.i.o.t act is still needed is only a matter of placing safety and security on a balance scale along with freedom and privacy as well as a matter of being conservative or being liberal. In my opinion,there are many reasons why we still need the Patriot act. Some people may believe the act is interfering and messing with the American beliefs of privacy but I believe it is safer to invade someone's privacy then to end up dealing with another successful terrorist attack. Some people believe that the patriot act can only result in the government receiving too much power and having too much access. Beings though because of the patriot act 15 terrorist plots were disrupted, I feel as though America would be a lot more safer with the act then without. Although it is believed that the patriot act was/is being used for things other then preventing terrorist acts such as putting homeless people off the streets, I'd still believe that things could be much worse without it. The only reason someone could have a major problem with the patriot act was if they were up to something themselves. If you're not up to something, then why worry about the government worrying about you? There is no doubt on the patriot act being successful on what it was supposed to do which was prevent terrorist acts and that's why I believe we still need the u.s.a patriot act.

This act in itself has redefined what a terrorist is because the requirements of being a suspicious person are not specific enough. Terrorism is the main concern, however many feel that the focus is to take over the lives of Americans by invading their privacy. Certainly this would raise debate because privacy is something that Americans feel like they are owed. Americans want safety but not at the cost of losing their privacy. Something could and should be done to please them in both ways. Maybe the techniques that are allowed by means of this act could be change so that innocent Americans aren’t being interrogated, in a sense. If efforts to protect the U.S continue to be put in the wrong place it may turn out for the worst. One comment brought out that this issue may be leading us closer and closer to a dictatorship. Another said that essentially the terrorist have won because of this controversy. Both of these statement are exactly what we don’t want to happen so I think its best that the whole act should not be changed rather some pieces should be tweaked. If not, our reality will become the fiction of Tony Scott’s Enemy Of the State.

The power that the Patriot Act allows the government to yield is unnecessary to achieve the means it sets out to accomplish. For example, the pieces of the law that allow agents access to library records is completely bogus. The possibility of abuse of this law is far greater than it's ability to do good. Rather than actually taking a hard look at the consequences of our best idea- being national security- pride and patriotism or shaming others for lack thereof in questioning this law has brought us to hastily procured legislation that restrict basic freedoms set in our Constitution. 

The threat lies in the fact that most common citizens, let alone the Senate or House members, don't understand its provisions whether they be positive or negative. Rather than attempt to improve international relations thus making those suspected of terrorism less inclined to hate us on principle, we relinquish our freedoms from ourselves by letting the law go as it stands now without further dissection. I believe with the amount of corruption within the government and the judicial system, individual courts or FBI agents with NSLs should not be able to pick and choose who has their Constitutional rights taken away based on suspicion like what types of books they like to read. 

I am not saying in any way that we should not investigate possible terror plots, but the current standing of the Patriot Act puts the basic everyday rights of citizens in jeopardy when they are not the ones who should be suspected of terrorism. The position of, "well if you're doing nothing wrong then it shouldn't matter, right?" grinds my gears especially. So basically, you're not religious so you shouldn't have the right to practice any religion you want anyway. We all think you're guilty, so you don't need a fair trial anyway, right? 

It's important to note, that this act does not just focus on international terrorists, but also terrorists within our own country. The act does not focus on "innocent" Americans, so no one should be too worried about being "spied" on, unless they're doing something they shouldn't. Basically, the government won't waste their time spying on anyone that does not need to be watched. They focus on people that have the potential to harm others. 

Due to the rise of technology, and more resources available for people to purchase (legally, and illegally), I believe that the act should still be a law. The security, and safety of the citizens should never be compromised, and should continue to be the highest priority for this government. Although some may be unaware, this act has actually stopped more than 30 terror plots. So, while some may think this is wrong, and unjust, it's better to think about how this has helped, rather than how it hurts. 

Honestly, I don't believe that the average American would enjoy being spied on, yet the Patriot Act justifies it by mentioning that it'll pick out all the bad apples from our populous. But how? Under what assumption? Sure, there are judges to go through. Agents themselves are also required to provide reasonable evidence before any “bugging” can begin. Surely, we can trust our fellow government workers to decide who gets to be followed and who doesn't. Can we not?

Before freaking out and checking your walls for microphones, cameras and other things of the sort, let's understand what kind of people are the ones being tracked. Who the Patriot Act follows isn't common people like you and I. The average American isn't going to be followed, regardless of ethnicity, gender, or religion. Tourists, suspects, and other people that are actively moving in and out of the country are possible victims of the Patriot Act. The law is dedicated to keeping surveillance over sketchy and dishonest characters, and preventing them from possibly committing a dangerous crime that could breach the security of this country.

My personal opinion on the matter is that we still need the Patriot Act. I don't agree with the out government spying on people, especially using suspicion as a way to track down potential terrorists. But, like any good parent that wants the best for their children, they'll do what is necessary to protect their children (let's hope). Citizens of this country shouldn't be alarmed, this so-called “spying” isn't anything new. It has been going on for years. And as long as you feel comfortable living the life you currently are living, I'd say don't worry about the government or the Patriot Act. It's for the best.

The way I felt about the movie, as the beginning started I didn't think that some people in the government and congress would do something as shady as what happened to Phillip Hammersley. It made me think about how the government can turn on one another. It also made me feel that it would turn on the people in the country. The government only let the people hear what they want to hear. 

The government in the film is portrayed as shady,insane, and not trusted. In the beginning when Phillip Hammersley video of him being killed was revealed because the government was tapping the guy phone that switched the tape at the murder scene. This made me feel that the government does not care about people privacies. Looking closely at the movie when they were tapping the guy phone that had the video of Phillip Hammersley death, they were tapping his phone line and computer for their own safety. This makes me feel that some people in the government only does things to protect themselves and not that people. 

The government should not tap phone lines, computers, or anything that has to do with people privacies. I do believe they should tap phone lines if they desperately believe that it is an attack on America or something suspicious. National Security as went up since 9/11 and other attacks that succeeded. This mean that the government needs to take action on the bigger things. Tapping phones is not the only way people connect. Computers aren't the only way. If that is the case, are they going to start checking our mail that comes to our homes? Our facebooks,or twitters? People are getting more clever as the years go by. They know the government expects so they do the unexpected. Such as 9/11.

In this movie I found the things that occurred on the governments behalf not to be surprising at all. The American government keeps major things from us that go against all of our rights as citizens. I don’t know who determines the definition of the terms “safety”, “protect” and “citizen” and what it means to the government of the United States. It is appalling to me that the “citizens” we are “protecting” had no idea that devices used and created for terrorist could at any moment be them.

In the movie Dean played by Will Smith kept repeating that he had no idea what was going on and why it was happening. In the scene when he meets up with the real Brill his ignorance as a citizen shows also when him and his wife are in the kitchen and she emphasizes how important it is for us to know about the changes that are made and how our privacy might be on the line. That is the issue with Americans they don’t follow up on current government changes and they don’t ask questions when there is confusion with a bill or law.

This movie was created well before the 9-11 attack, which says a lot. In movies I realized that if it is in a film already and it involves sensitive information about how the government operates. The government is way past the technology they use to “detect terrorists”. I do not agree with the government having access to cutting my phone lines, tapping into my phone and freezing my accounts. In the movie and reality the public should be more aware of the governments gadgets and when it is happening to them. Overall the thought of someone constantly watching you is here and always has been. I have every doubt that the government does not know the definition of acceptable and enough evidence to investigate someone. To be frank we are all being investigated and watched. I wouldn't be surprised if I got locked up for my Anti American views they might think that is enough evidence to wreck my home and ruin my life just like in the movie. 

American Government - D

September 14, 2012

Enemy of the State:

Throughout the film Enemy of the State, the government is portrayed as being very cynical and abusers of the system. I never knew that the government had the power to view all your phone calls, text messages, and emails. This is known as invasion of privacy which I thought was completely not allowed, unless given permission by a judge or the person was convicted of a crime. It is scary to think that one day we are going to live in a society where everything we do is recorded, and it makes me scared to even live my life. I should definitely not feel this way considering our country is known to be full of freedom and liberty. 

It was a disgrace watching such an important agency (NSA) use their power for personal purposes. A large amount of the things done in this movie were done illegally such as the installment of cameras/microphones in Will Smith’s attire. Every conversation Will Smith had with someone was observed and recorded by the NSA, just so they were able to save themselves from massive destruction. This is definitely unacceptable and makes me wonder if officials ever listened to conversations I had with my family/friends. Obviously it makes a difference if I am suspected to be a terrorist, but then again anything is possible. Although the PATRIOT Act is definitely a controversial issue, there are some things that definitely need to be altered, such as section 215. I learned that the government is allowed to seize “any tangible thing without a warrant from emails to browsing histories to library records.” This defeats the purpose of privacy, however I think in cases where terrorism is expected then having the ability to just go through someones personal records is necessary. I think it’s difficult to find a balance between the security of a country and the privacy of the citizens. In my opinion, I feel like the government realizes what happened without the Patriot Act, which is 9/11, so they want to take as much precaution as possible no matter what the circumstances. Honestly all I care about is my safety, privacy comes second.

When talking about privacy, the plot of this movie has none. The people in the movie does not respect the privacy of other people. There was a part where they were looking at Will Smith's background with his ex-girlfriend. They looked at his bank account and even sticked their nose in his private life like his past relationship! I mean, I don't want people to know what i did back back because past is past. Also when the old crusty villain told his minions to dig some dirty deeds so that "no one will believe him before he talks". I mean, he's in the government and he's the one doing the bad things. Will is not a terrorist, just a threat to him and he's using all these things to invade his privacy! And there were no judge to ask permission to, no warrants, no whatsoever! They were even trespassing in some of the scenes! I think, the government should only know the basics information about me. Like the schools that I go to, where I live, what kind of job I have, like that. Not my bank account or past love interest. 

My only concern about this is that, what if people inside the country abuse this power. It's not going to be the terrorist but the citizens who use it for their own selfish actions. We're going to be the enemy of each other and this will be a whole different problem that we have to solve. The only question is, how can we have this power without abusing it?