Reference no: EM131887305

Respond to the following discussions from classmates (X5) Write how you would respond to their discussions) with approximately 100 words or more each. Be thoughtful and insightful and it must demonstrate critical thinking and analysis.

1. Could this be the next great tool to also help combat terrorism?

Textalyzer Could Be Used By Law Enforcement

What is a Textalyzer?

A textalyzer can determine if a driver involved in a motor vehicle accident was texting or otherwise using a cell phone at the time of the crash.

The textalyzer taps into a cell phones operating system to analyze recent activity. If a bill before the New York legislature passes, law enforcement officers will be able to determine immediately if a driver was using a cell phone when the crash occurred. If a driver refuses to allow the officer to inspect the cell phone, penalties would be similar to refusing a breathalyzer including license suspension.

People opposed to the textalyzer claim it will be an invasion of privacy and violate a person's constitutional rights. Proponents of the bill claim it will not violate a driver's privacy because law enforcement would still need a search warrant to obtain specific data from the phone.

The textalyzer would only be used to determine if the cell phone was in use at the time of the car crash. Proponents also say that the textalyzer will make people think twice before using a cell phone while they are driving. Thoughts?

2. Ethical issues arise when practices conflict, question, or contradict moral or professional conduct (Banks, 2012). One of the controversial military technologies used to combat domestic terrorism is the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) or unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), also more commonly known as "drones." Among its many issues is its purpose for surveillance; the ACLU and other civil rights advocates consider it as an invasion of privacy.

These domestic surveillance drones are often used by non-military users and law enforcement agencies to ensure public safety (Greenwald, 2013). Police departments have also already acknowledged how drones could carry nonlethal weapons such as Tasers or bean-bag guns (Greenwald, 2013). However, a more significant concern is how lethal weaponized drones like the Switchblade are. According to Time Magazine, it is small enough to be carried in a backpack and makes use of a real-time video feed for a precise target until it is directed to lunge into the person and explode upon impact (Greenwald, 2013).

While law enforcement agencies love drone technology because it allows them to keep safe, capture, and kill dangerous criminals, it raises the ethical issue of how they violate the right of privacy. Surveillance drones are also getting cheaper and cheaper (Greenwald, 2013) and have developed so much so that there are even "selfie" drones. What this evolution implies is that even citizens can buy and use these drones and may also disguise them as private property or purposes. Ultimately, they run the risk of being used by both military and non-military people for infringing the privacy rights of other people, or worse, being weaponized.

3. Antiterrorism and Ethics

The use of drones in fighting terrorism has become a major area of controversy in the United States where the government has been accused of using unconstitutional means to target the United States citizens. On the other hand, the policymakers, as well as law enforcers, have been trying to use ethics to justify the approach arguing that the use of drones is essential in eliminating terrorists who are a threat to national security (Gonzales, 2013).

However, there has been increasing ethical concerns about the approach as there is increased fear that the drones might be used by paramilitary agencies to target innocent people. The other concern is that the government might use the weapon to kill too much and too often. In other words, they will ignore the legal channels as well as the right to life and eliminate any suspected terrorist. The other ethical concern is that using drones to eliminate suspects gives the state too much power over individuals who are against the American moral values and principles.

According to research on the war on terrorism and fight against domestic terrorism, there have indications that military technology has become a major component. For instance, one example where military technology is being used is in the gathering of intelligence through surveillance.

Though there have been critics on the unconstitutionality of using technology to spy on the United States citizen, the justification is that terrorism has evolved over the years and are using technology such as the social media and phones in communication, launching attacks as well as recruiting more members. Similarly, the same technology can be used in counterterrorism to gather information about the suspects.

In my opinion, I believe the use of this technology is ethical but can also be unethical. The ethical side is that it helps in identifying threats to national security and could be resourceful if used in the right manner. However, the same technology can be used in spying people who not even on the terrorism radar for political gains.

4. Hello Readers,

To start this off I had to decide which was most important for our nation now and into the future. At the end of the day I am not able to get around the importance of national security. Our constitution was written in 1787 and through all the changes that have occurred over the last 231 years, the rationale behind our rights have not been changed. Our forefathers had our best interest at heart at the time and if they would have known that technology would have evolved to the point where national security was at risk, things would be different.

The government needs to have a panel of voting members to determine if a social media site as a whole or specific page poses a risk to national security. If it do, the website or personal page will then lose their freedom of speech. Freedom of speech should not put other individual's in harm's way. Websites who allow this type of propaganda are in violation of section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

It "states that it is unlawful to provide a designated foreign terrorist organization with "material support or resources," including "any property, tangible or intangible, or services" (Poe, 2015).

5. As we have learned in previous modules, the Internet and social media play a large and significant role in the radicalization of individuals to the point they become terrorists themselves. I believe that the best way to balance national security and national security through communication networks and social media is to monitor social media companies and sites responsibly. While media should strive not to promote the cause of terrorism or its methods, it should also take advantage of its freedom to preserve democracy in a way that they symbolize individual freedoms (Perl, 1997).

To do this, social media companies should monitor the content of pages that appear to be "material support or resources" that contribute to foreign terrorist organizations (Poe, 2015); these can include any tangible or intangible property or services. In other words, the government, communication networks, and social media should make sure that terrorist organizations use the available, convenient, and efficient communication tools (such as the Internet, websites, and social media pages) for recruitment or propaganda purposes. By stopping these manipulative practices and use of social media, terrorist training opportunities would diminish if not be eradicated in the future.