Reference no: EM131633699

Respond to Peers: Respond to at least two of your classmates' posts. In your responses to your peers of at least 100 words per response, extend the conversation by examining their claims or arguments in more depth.

For example, compare your evaluation of the Patriot Act to a classmate's that is opposite to your own evaluation. Support your claims with examples from the required material(s) and/or other scholarly resources, and properly cite any references according to APA standards.

My discussion post:

The USA PATRIOT Act is an Act of Congress that was signed into law by PresidentGeorge W. Bush on October 26, 2001, with the primary objective of uniting and strengthening America by providing appropriate tools required to intercept and obstruct acts of terrorism. The question as to whether the Act infringes civil rights and liberties is a regular grapple in the minds of U.S. citizens.

It has been one of the hottest debates in different states given the fact that one's constitutional rights are being violated in the process of information gathering. Additionally, security issues are on the rise as a result of the increase in terrorist attacks across the country.

One can easily get confused on whether to protect their privacy or to consider national security as their main priority. To clear up this confusion and come up with a vivid conclusion on the issue of intelligence gathering with the motive of identifying terrorists and its impact on one's privacy has enshrined in the constitution (DeCew, 1986). As such, it is prudent to look into the situation critically to come up with a sweeping conclusion.

Due to globalization and revolution in information, terrorism in the 21st century has changed and plateaued to a mega-terrorism. Terrorists have harmonized their activities with new discoveries in science and technology, precisely internet and communication technologies (Bowers & Keys, 1998).

A small number of terrorists can kill a large number of people and damage a lot of property because of these advancements. This is a clear indication that these terrorists have the potential to create havoc of a larger magnitude than the 9/11. According to research that was done by Boykoff, the impact of mega-terrorism in a crowded area would be disastrous; 500,000 people would die, and hundreds of thousands more would get injuries (2006). Such an attack would grossly affect the world economy and push millions of people into poverty.

This would create a second death toll in the world and America and would change the rest of the world forever. Such threats can be controlled by intercepting terrorist communications and identifying terrorist patterns. NSA surveillance has prevented attacks from happening and has reduced the magnitude of attacks (DeCew, 1986). Although the act infringes civil rights and liberties, its importance overrides one's privacy since national security is much more vital.

References

Bowers, S. R. & Keys, K. R. (1998). Technology and Terrorism: The New Threat for the Millennium. Faculty Publications and Presentations. Paper 65.

Boykoff, J. (2006). How Patriotic is the Patriot Act?: Freedom Versus Security in the Age of Terrorism- AmitaiEtzioni.

DeCew, J.W. (1986). The scope of privacy in law and ethics. Law and Philosophy, 5(2), 145-173.

Student 1:

The PATRIOT ACT was signed into law on October 26, 2001 by then President George W Busch. At the time the country was afraid, Mad, and all together disgusted at the horrors that had taken place on 9/11/2001. At that time the county came together and was willing to do anything they could to prevent another act of terrorism as was seen that day.

"In response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C., Congress enacted the USA PATRIOT Act to provide federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies with much greater power to scrutinize individuals suspected of engaging in or supporting terrorism.

Commonly referred to as just the Patriot Act, the law reduced the legal burden the government previously had to meet to wiretap telephone conversations; justify the use of "key logger" devices, which register every stroke made on a computer; and track Internet use on private computers."

(Ivers, 2013) I believe that in the time of the attack the country was ready to take vengeance and prevent this from ever happening again so as it says the red tape and loopholes that had previously been placed as road block to investigate and gather information were removed and the homeland security was given more leeway to gather the information needed for these cases. "A particularly controversial provision of the law included an unprecedented working relationship between the Department of Justice and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) permitting them to share information on domestic and foreign "targets" suspected of terrorist activities.

The Patriot Act did not establish any firm guidelines to restrict gathering or sharing information about individuals who may well be engaging in lawful activities, such as protesting American policies on the Internet or through more traditional demonstrations. Some critics of the Patriot Act suggested the new standards allowed the government to engage in surveillance of individuals who were not breaking any laws but simply exercising their constitutional rights to disagree with the government." (Ivers 2013) Does this act infringe on civil rights and liberties? I would have to say yes particularly the 1st and 5th amendments.

Reference

Ivers, G (2013). Constitutional Law: and introduction (electronic Version).

Student 2:

The Patriot Act was implemented after the terrorist attacks on September 11,2001 in New York and Washington D.C. "Congress enacted the USA Patriot Act to provide federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies with greater power to scrutinize individuals suspected of engaging or supporting terrorism." (Ivers,2013)

The tragedy of the attacks on September 11,2001, had the entire country in shock and therefore the hands were forced to implement the Patriot Act for a more secure country. However, even though the Patriot Act broadened the definition of terrorism and gave more security by monitoring people who were suspect to terrorism, there were still controversies.

One issue regarding the Patriot act was section 213: "Sneak and Peek Warrants". This would allow authorities to search someone's home or business without having to immediately notify the target of probe. (Abramson and Godboy,2005) This section could be seen as a violation of the fourth amendment, which does infringe on civil rights and liberties. The fourth amendment of the constitution of the United States ensures the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects.

Unreasonable searches along with these shall not be violated and no warrant shall issue unless there is a suitable cause by affirmation oath. This act violates the fourth amendment because the cause is not notified to the person or people immediately as the issue is found. Critics also argue that the "sneak peek warrant" is used for minor crimes as well and not just terror and espionage. (Abramson and Godboy,2005)

Another reason why I believe the Patriot Act infringes on civil rights and liberties is because of section 203 (b) and (d) (Information Sharing) This section allows information to be shared with intelligence agencies and other parts of the government. "Critics warn that unrestricted sharing could lead to the development of massive databases about citizens who are not the targets of criminal investigations." (Abramson and Godboy,2005) Basic rights of privacy for a citizen could be violated by this section of the Patriot Act.

References

Ivers, G (2013). Constitutional Law: and introduction (electronic Version).

Abramson,L and Godboy,M. (2005) The Patriot Act :Key Controversies.