Public Safety Vs Privacy
Public Safety vs. Privacy
How can we increase public safety without giving up our civil liberties? This has become a common question among the American public in the light of recent events. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, it has become evident that Americans will lean towards a "safety first" approach, allowing the government to do whatever they deem necessary to secure our safety. Although a majority of the public would draw the line when the government intrudes on their private life, today's advanced thermal imaging technology and facial recognition it has made it hard to find that fine line. The government's efforts to prevent and control acts of terrorism must be balanced with an individual's civil liberties.
In today's society of social media and cellphone usage, it has become common for the public to share things that were once private before this new era. Due to this, the public's definition of "privacy" has become an obscure one; something private to you might not be considered private to another. Jonathan Franzen, an acclaimed author on the subject, defines privacy as " sparing me from the intrusion of other people's personal lives" (Franzen, 367). The majority of the public believes in a false sense of privacy, that everything they do on their …show more content…
For example, in the case, Kyllo v. United States police officials attempted to expand their powers by using thermal imaging to combat drug dealers, but ended up violating the Fourth Amendment by not providing a warrant. The impact of this case "has given law enforcement important clues regarding the government's future use of technology to gather criminal evidence" (Colbridge, 383). While it is important for the police officials to do their jobs, it is equally important that law-abiding citizens feel safe in their own homes, and do not get treated equally as the
How can we increase public safety without giving up our civil liberties? This has become a common question among the American public in the light of recent events. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, it has become evident that Americans will lean towards a "safety first" approach, allowing the government to do whatever they deem necessary to secure our safety. Although a majority of the public would draw the line when the government intrudes on their private life, today's advanced thermal imaging technology and facial recognition it has made it hard to find that fine line. The government's efforts to prevent and control acts of terrorism must be balanced with an individual's civil liberties.
In today's society of social media and cellphone usage, it has become common for the public to share things that were once private before this new era. Due to this, the public's definition of "privacy" has become an obscure one; something private to you might not be considered private to another. Jonathan Franzen, an acclaimed author on the subject, defines privacy as " sparing me from the intrusion of other people's personal lives" (Franzen, 367). The majority of the public believes in a false sense of privacy, that everything they do on their …show more content…
For example, in the case, Kyllo v. United States police officials attempted to expand their powers by using thermal imaging to combat drug dealers, but ended up violating the Fourth Amendment by not providing a warrant. The impact of this case "has given law enforcement important clues regarding the government's future use of technology to gather criminal evidence" (Colbridge, 383). While it is important for the police officials to do their jobs, it is equally important that law-abiding citizens feel safe in their own homes, and do not get treated equally as the