(Student’s Full Name)
Question: Given our policies relating to national defense and law enforcement and the priority given to homeland security, should privacy rightly be considered a thing of the past?
Privacy Rights are More Important than Law Enforcement, Community Protection, and Domestic Safety
Privacy rights are more important than law enforcement, community protection, and domestic safety because it is considered that “privacy as a basic human good or right with intrinsic value” (Nass et al., 2009, p. 77). This means that privacy is “being objectively valuable in itself” and it is an “essential component of human well-being” (Nass et. al., 2009, p. 77). Therefore, if the privacy rights of an individual are recognized then the “moral uniqueness” would be respected and recognized in that individual (Nass et. al., 2009, p. 77).
It is important to recognize the individual’s right to privacy because it “facilitates or promotes other fundamental values” (Nass et al, 2009, p. 77). Some of these “fundamental values” include: “[p]ersonal autonomy (the ability to make personal decisions);” “[i]ndividuality;” “[r]espect;” and “[d]ignity and worth as human beings” (Nass et al., 2009, p. 77). Furthermore, if an individual’s right to privacy is violated then it can potentially expose the individual to physical harm or danger, “stigma,” “embarrassment,” and “discrimination” (Nass et al., 2009, p. 77).
In light of the above, it can be argued that privacy rights should not be considered a thing of the past in order to ensure domestic security, laws are enforced, and the community is protected. This is because the dignity and the self-worth of the individual will be threatened if this is done. Additionally, the individual can potentially exposed to further harm or danger if her privacy rights are violated, which is will be counterintuitive to the intentions of law enforcement agencies.
Privacy Issues are Less Important than Law Enforcement, Community Protection, and Domestic Safety
The increasing threats to security through acts of terrorism from foreign and domestic agents have caused many to recognize the necessity of ensuring security even at the risk of taking one’s privacy. Lauren Cassani Davis (2016) explains that the “Snowden leaks” caused many to think about the “complicated tradeoff” for personal individual privacy and national security (para. 3). The author noted that a survey indicated that almost “half of all respondents were most willing to support increased surveillance of public places” and “24 percent were most willing” to accept measures to decrease freedom to “access sources on Internet” (Davis, 2016, par. 13). Davis (2016) explains that although Americans are to “feel” uncomfortable with measures that are too “personal,” they are still willing to accept some form of surveillance for the sake of national security (par. 14). Therefore, in light of the responses from the survey, Americans consider that privacy is less important than law enforcement, community protection, and domestic safety.
Additionally, President Obama defended the “PRISM program for collecting Internet communications” (Mughal, 2016, p. 5). The US President had to defend this program after it was revealed in the Snowden leaks that the program facilitates “bulk telephony metadata extraction,” which is permitted by the provisions of the US Patriot Act (Mughal, 2016, p. 5). Furthermore, Sarah Frueh (2009) indicates that some “data-mining techniques can be effective, speeding and expanding the work of investigators” who have some information about a particular individual on the terrorist watch list (para. 3). Investigators need to utilize “data-mining techniques” and “metadata extraction” methods so that a terrorist can be quickly identified and located online (Frueh, 2009, para. 3). Since these effective data extraction methods are necessary in quickly tracking terrorists, it is necessary that the public allow investigators to use these so as to ensure their safety.
References
Davis, L. (2016, February 3). How Do Americans Weigh Privacy Versus National Security. Retrieved June 19, 2016, from http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/02/heartland-monitor-privacy-security/459657/
Frueh, S. (2009, December 1). Preventing Terrorism, Protecting Privacy: Report Examines the Pros and Cons of Data Mining | IN FOCUS, 8.3. Retrieved June 19, 2016, from http://www.infocusmagazine.org/8.3/nsia_data_mining.html
Mughal, J. (2016, December 1). National Security v. Privacy. Canadian Student Review, 1(1), 1-10. Retrieved June 19, 2016, from https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/national-security-vs-privacy-in-the-modern-age.pdf.
Nass, I.O., S. J., Levit, L. A., Gostin, L. O., Nass, S. J., Levit, L. A., & Gostin, L. O. (2009). Beyond the HIPAA Privacy Rule: Enhancing Privacy, Improving Health Through Research. National Academies Press.
