The Washington Post explains the background to the Senate's current debate over whether phone companies should be held legally responsible for cooperating with the U.S. government to violate your privacy.
Read the article and then answer the following questions. Please connect the article specifically in your post.
1. Does the U.S. government have the right to listen in on your phone conversations? If yes, why? If no, is there a situation where the government would have the right to listen in on your phone conversations?
2. If your phone company allows the government to wiretap your phone without a warrant do you think you should have the right to sue your phone company? Why? Should other people have this right?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
55 comments:
This is a issue that is very complicated. Both sides have very good arguments. I feel that if the Government has a very good reason they should have the right to tap in on someone's phone bill. This could be a way for the FBI to capture a wanted or suspected terrorist. Knowing that the Government could phone tap that could scare any person from planning something that could threat the safety of the U.S. If the phone company follows the Government assignment you should not have the right to sue. The attempt is to catch anyone that is a threat to the country. They would only wiretap if you are a suspect. If you think about it you should be more worried about being a suspected Terrorist.
I do not believe the government has the right to listen in on phone conversations without the proper warrant. If the government does not show good grounds for listening to a person's phone conversation, they are not only invading that person's privacy, but they are wasting their time on a suspect who probably isn't even guilty. However, I do not think the phone companies should be held responsible like Mr. Cheney said, I think the government should be held responsible for ilegally obtaining evidence. If there was no warrant issued for the evidence, the government wouldn't even be able to use it in court. Things like warrants are there to protect you, the citizen, from being walked over and controlled by a government suspicious of its own citizens. Innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
If someone is a suspected terrorist, I do believe phone tapping for that particular person is just with a warrant. However, tapping into just anyone's phone is useless and unfair. If my phone company allowed the government to tap into my phone without a warrant, I do feel I should have the right to sue. It would invade my privacy and without a warrant I would feel my right of privacy was violated. Cheney states, "Those who assist the government in tracking terrorists should not be punished with lawsuits," Which is true if their is a suspicion of those being tracked as being a terrorist, but not true for just any citizen.
As inferred in the Bill of Rights, every United States citizen has the right to privacy. When the government wiretaps they are infringing upon these rights. As stated in an article on SFGate.com , “Bush acknowledged in December that he had authorized the National Security Agency to intercept phone calls and e-mails between U.S. residents and terror suspects abroad without the court approval required by a 1978 federal law” . The key words here are without the court approval required. The action of the executive when it comes to wiretapping is illegal because it defies the statues set in a federal law. The president can not simply disregard federal law when he sees fit. If the president had received court approval to do so and had reasonable cause to tap an individual's phone, then it would be both legal and provide necessary information. The government can listen in on phone conversations when they have a strong belief that it is necessary to protect national security and is done so following the legal guidelines already established.
If the government required the phone company to wiretap, you can not sue the company. They are simply complying to the supreme law of the land. The government is at fault for requiring the taps, the phone company should not be punished for complying to the government's demands. Any lawsuits should be brought against the government agency conducting the illegal invasion of privacy, not towards the company simply used by the agency as a means to carry out the government's agenda.
U.S. open assualt on wiretap suit Bob Engleko- www.SFGate.com
I don’t think that the United States government should be able to wiretap into any citizen’s phone conversations. I think that they should only be able to do this if they have suspicions and are issued a warrant. It is pointless for the government to wiretap into anybody’s conversations because they are most likely going to be innocent and it would be a waste of time. If they could only use their wiretapping technique when they had a warrant then it would be time well spent and would probably lead them somewhere in the right direction for finding out more about a terrorist suspect. If the government was listening in on my phone calls for no particular reason and my phone company gave them all of my information I would want to sue. At some point in time Cheney said, “Those who assist the government in tracking terrorists should not be punished with lawsuits.” If the government had a warrant then yes, the people who help find the terrorist shouldn’t be sued but if it’s a citizen that isn’t accused of anything and they are tapping into their phones for not particular reason you should be able to sue. As we all know in this country you are innocent until proven guilty. If we want to keep true to this statement we are going to have to make sure that the government can’t wiretap into other people’s conversations for no particular reason, they’re going to have to have suspicions and been issued a warrant.
The U.S government does not have the right to listen to my phone conversation; it is a violation of my phone privacy. The only time it would be right for them to listen to my conversation is if they have a warrant for me. I think I would have the right to sue my phone company if they let the government listen to my phone conversation without a warrant. Yes, I think other people should have this right.
Nick said...
Krystina I respect your opinion on this manner, but I have to disagree with you. You know as well as everyone else in this world does about our huge conflict and turmoil with terrorism, so why not give up a small portion of your privacy to the government. I agree with your warrant argument, but that can be a problem later in the future. If someone is planning a terrorist attack, which isn't uncommon anymore, then taking the time to be concerned with their privacy can put lives in danger, and I'm sure you don't want that. By the time a warrant is issued the attack might already be underway, or at least the full planning and process of it will. Look at 9/11 for instance, the co-conspirers that lived in here in the United States were never caught until the damage had already been done. The government was totally unprepared and had no leads to even begin with a warrant issuing process. The terrorists capitalized on our ineptness and killed 3,000 of our people. I'm sure there's more terrorists all through out our country carefully planning another attack on us, because they know that they can get away with it due to our government's irresponsibility. We wouldn't be in jeopardy all the time if our government had ways to be prepared for such a terrorist tactic, that is if the government were allowed access to people's private phone conversations. It's not like they'll listen in on you every second and record everything, they'll just check up on it once in a while to maintain order and make sure that nothing is suspicious. After all, most of us have nothing to hide, so where inlies the problem? For those that do have something to hide, they can brace themselves because this time our government will be ready. We should guarantee that an event like 9/11 shall never happen again, but that does just go to show you what can happen and what types of damage can be done when we're totally unprepared.
Nick said...
I believe that it is okay for the government to listen in on phone conversations. This method will help strengthen our national security in many ways. Being that our country is undergoing war on terrorism, the government needs to have the ability to hear others in case, God forbid, we're being plotted against in another terrorist attack like 9/11. I hate to admit it, but we live in a world of terror and it's sick, but because of that we need to have as much security as we need so we can be protected and safe, not become yet another victim of these slummy terrorists. In the article I read, a lot of people thought that this was an invasion of their right to privacy, the funny thing is that privacy is not a guaranteed right in the constitution, also referred to by the article. Is privacy worth having, if we're not safe and secure? I don't understand how others would see this as a threat especially if they know that they've got nothing to hide. If they've got nothing to hide, then what are they so afraid of? For that reason alone, is a good enough one to get this phone tap law enacted. If we're guaranteed safety and security, then we should have no problem having our privacy invaded a little bit. After all, we shouldn't have anything to hide and if we do, then we definitely need this law immediately.
Kyrstina said...
1. No, i dont think its ok for the goverment to listen in on peoples conversations on the phone. I believe thats an invation of privacy and they shouldnt do that unless the goverment has an warrent. They could be listening in on conversations that is none of their buissness, and that might offend people in different ways, but if they get a warrent then they have the right to and it doesnt matter if the people get offended then because the goverment took time to look into what they are doing.
2. Once again I dont think thats right. If the phone company gives out information personally yes, i would sue them because if the goverment doesnt have a warrent they have no right or evidence to invade peoples privacy like that. If an phone company does that then they arent a very good phone company and i think that people will get relly mad if people listen to their conversation like that.
I believe that the right for the government to listen in on phone calls should be highly restricted. It should only be allowed with a search warrant. I believe it is a great way to gain a last piece of evidence to charge someone with a crime. It should also only be used in serious crimes, or to use against repeat offenders.
I think the reason this is such a big issue is because it seems like it is more than just about wiretaps and phone companies. While it is difficult for citizens and even congress to understand, they are doing their job to protect our rights.
I believe the government should be able to listen in on any phone conversation or other communication. If you are not a terrorist or not doing anything illegal, then you don't have anything to worry about. You can't be charged unless there is some kind of evidence for a crime like conspiracy to commit terrorism. The best way to prove that someone is conspiring is to hear a person say, "I want to commit terrorism."
I don't think people should be able to sue their phone company for wiretap, because then none of them would want to allow the government access. It is that simple.
I do not believe that the government has the right to wiretap any citizens’ phones without a warrant. If the government highly suspects a person of participating in terrorist activities then they should have enough evidence to obtain a warrant. However, I don’t think that the phone companies are the ones to blame. I agree with Cheney when he says, “those who assist the government in tracking terrorists should not be punished with lawsuits.” The phone companies were only following orders given to them by our government. The people that should be punished are whoever it was that authorized the wiretapping without a warrant. I think if the phone companies continue to help with this illegal act they should be punished now that its being debated in the Senate whether or not that is unconstitutional. When if comes down to it, the government should have enough evidence to get a warrant if they are accusing someone of being terrorist. You must have done something highly suspicious to be suspected of being a terrorist. I understand that after 9/11 we had the immediate need to protect ourselves, but I don’t think we should forget our basic rights on the way.
1. Does the U.S. government have the right to listen in on your phone conversations? If yes, why? If no, is there a situation where the government would have the right to listen in on your phone conversations?
2. If your phone company allows the government to wiretap your phone without a warrant do you think you should have the right to sue your phone company? Why? Should other people have this right?
I don't think the government should be allowed to wiretap people without a warrant. This opens the door to serious discrimination. They can pick whoever they want to be a "terrorist suspect" and freely listen in on their phone conversations. None of us want to have another 9-11 but taking away or basic rights one by one is not the way to go about preventing it. Once they take away this right, what is next? If they can pick and choose what rights we have in the name of "safety" we really don't have any protected rights at all. If they seriously suspect someone of being a terrorist, they should have enough reason/ evidence to get a court warrant, if the court says it is o.k. for them to investigate someone, than they should be able to do it, but under the constitution, they need a warrant
Yes, I think you should be allowed to sue the phone companies. But even more, I think there should be a law against letting the phone companies listen in on our conversations, oh wait there is one, it's called the constitution! If people receive damages from something when they are unconstitutionally wire tapped, not only should they be allowed to sue the phone companies, they should get repairs from the U.S. government. I don't understand why different rules would apply in this situation than in any other similar situation. I think that no one should have the right to listen in on your telephone calls, again if they have a warrant, that is a different story, but since they don't, this is totally illegal.
I believe that the government does not have the right to listen in on phone conversations. People phone calls are private and most likely have nothing to do with government issues. The Washington Post article repeatedly states the fact that the government can listen in on phone conversations without a warrant. I believe that of the government did get a warrant that it would be okay for them to listen to their conversations. If a phone company aloud the government the right to listen in on my phone calls I would sue the phone company. I would sue them because it is none of their business to listen to what I am talking about. It violates the right of privacy. In conclusion, I believe the government doesn’t have the right to listen in on any ones phone calls unless they have a warrant.
This is my response to Justin, Jazmyn, and Kenny. I agree that it is important to investigate situations where there may be a possible threat to national security, but if the threat was serious enough and valid enough, why would they not be able to get a search warrant? If they seriously have strong reason/ evidence, they would have no problem at all getting a search warrant from a judge. Also, people get taken away all the time without a warrant. Because of all of the crazy stuff that got passed after september 11 the government can take people away without warrants and trials and hold them for indefinite amounts of time. Requiring the government to get a warrant protects everyone's rights and can still keep the country safe
I agree with Craig when he says that the government needs a proper warrant to tap in on a phone conversation. I also agree with him on how it invades someone’s privacy. The government has no right to randomly listen to anyone’s conversations without a proper warrant. Craig also makes a very good point about the second question too. I also really agree with him when he says it innocent until proven guilty not the other way around.
I think that the government does have the right to listen in on phone conversations, but only in cases where they believe it's necessary. However, I also think that they need a warrant before listening in on anything. If your a good person, and don't have any reason to be suspected of a terrorist action, then there's no reason for the government to even think about tapping into your phone lines. It's the criminals and possible terrorists that should be worried, and it's their rights that are going to be violated.
I definitly disagree with Cheney. I do think that if your phone company should tap your phone and listen without a warrant, then you should have the right to sue them. Although wiretapping is secretive and not actually known of to the victims, it's still a violation to privacy rights. They might also find out that there is no reason to tap your phone line while on the search for the warrant. If there is substantial evidence that a certain person is going to comitt a terrorist act, then it shouldn't be hard to get a warrant. Getting warrents for wiretapping also prevents the government from randomly listening in on conversations because they're bored.
I would have to disagree with Nick. Although I agree that if you have nothing to hide, invading your phone conversations shouldn't be a problem, there are things you talk about with people that you don't want anyone else to know. People talk about things like jobs, boyfriends, party life, college, and contacting people they haven't talked to in a very long time. These aren't everyday "Hey, how are you doing?" conversations. Who's to say the government isn't tapping into help lines that people call into when they want to commit suicide? Or international calls to family or friends? There's so many private conversations that you can only have to someone over the phone because it's just you and them. If the government received free reign to tap into any conversation they wanted without a warrant, then so many people would sue the companies, or maybe just stop talking on the phone. None of that would be good for anyone. The government needs warrants in order to tap someone's phone line.
I do not believe that the Senate should grant legal immunity to telephone companies for assissting in warrantless wiretaps of terrorism suspects. Although, the essential goal is to benefit society, and stop terrorism before it happens, it will not be effective. Imagine the millions of phone calls recieved and given every minute. Imagine the amount of money that we would put towards this ineffective solution, and then watch the other ways terrorists will work around our solution. To be completely honest, the intention of the law will start with terrorism, but then lead to criminal and civil disputes in courts. It was violate the right to privacy. I understand the concept of not having to worry if you're not doing anything wrong, but what if it was something personal and their only way of communication was through telephone? It just does not seem logically. It seems to me that it will start off overwhelming, and then lead to the law being turned and abused.
Ah Whoops sorry for a second I forget there were questions we need to answer! Just to add on to what I said before.....
I do not believe the United States has the right to listen in on phone conversations. I believe the only way one should be able to do so, is to have evidence to suspect any suspicious act of terrorism, and the listener must have a warrant.
Technically, everyone should be given their fair trial, and the option to sue phone companies. It violates the right to privacy. If a terrorist is found guilty through this process, obviously he or she would not be capable of suing the phone company as long as their was seizable evidence to initially start the tap.
I also agree with Jacobsansdry, I think he and I both realize all of the other issues that are going to come into play if this law was to be approved. There are way too many little details that are going to spin any and every case out of control.
I think that we all want the best for our country, but this is not going to get us there by granting phone companies the right to listen in on every conversation. This will only result in greater conflict.
In response to Melanie:
I agree with Melanie that wiretapping is an infringement on privacy rights, but I do not believe that the phone company should be sued. As stated in my earlier post, the phone company is simply complying to the government's demands. For example, in the current war, soldiers are told by the government to kill the “enemy” of the United States. Should in turn the Iraqi people( or United States people for that matter) have the right to sue the soldiers for killing others while following gov. orders? There are many instances where the government has used other corporations, agencies, etc. to carry out unjust means. I do not believe that those underneath the government are fully responsible for these actions. I believe the government is to hold the majority of the responsibilities they carry out. The corporations and such are merely accessories to the plan.
Oops, I forgot to answer the questions.
1. No, the government doesn't have the right to listen in on phone calls whenever they'd like. I believe that a warrant needs to be required. They need a sufficient amount of evidence before they invade someone's privacy with a warrant and without their consent.
2. I agree with Cheney, in most cases the phone company didn't have much choice but to allow the government to wiretap the phonelines. I believe the government should be punished if anyone is.
Response.
I agree with Nicki, if we were to make wiretapping legal, there would be far too much money spent. There are at least billions of calls being made everyday in the U.S., and the government can't listen to them all, so we're wasting time and money.
I agree with Kenny. I believe a person shouldn't have the right to sue if they are a suspect of terrorism. However, a warrant should be needed to prove there is a reason or suspicion to phone tap that particular person. Otherwise, I completely agree with Kenny.
I do not think the government has the right to listen to phone conversations. However, if they really suspect someone to be a terrorist or something, then they probably should listen to their phone conversations. I agree with Kenny. Both sides have really good arguments, so its difficult to make a decision.
I agree with Cheney. If the government told the phone companies to assist them, they have no choice, so the phone companies should never be held responsible.
I don't believe the government has the right to listen in on phone conversations. There should be at least a warrant involved for them to look at phone records or tap onto phones. If there is a problem with the safety of the country, such as listening on a terrorists phone conversation then yes, tapping onto the phone is fine. If someone robbed a liquor store and is bragging about it to his friend then no, his phone shouldn't be tapped. He'd be incriminated himself without a lawyer and without knowing there is an interrogation going on. Everyone has a right to privacy, for those who break that and make huge threats to the country then yes their phones should be tapped. For those who are not doing anything wrong, or committing small crimes then they still have a right to privacy.
The right to privacy is one that we all are given by the constitution. If the US has a good reason to tap our phone lines or someone else's, by all means do it. But since we all have the right to our privacy the government should not be allowed to listen in at all times. The government cannot use this evidence against us because it would be illegally seized and against our rights.
I do not agree with Kenny's post. The government should not be allowed to infringe upon our rights just to investigate a terrorist case. Again, I believe that if for example the government suspects me as a terrorist I would have had done something that produces a lot of evidence. I agree with jbecker when she makes the point that it is stated in the Bill of Rights that we have the right of privacy and the government cant just take that away when they feel like it.
I agree with two people's points, to start with what Craig said "Things like warrants are there to protect you, the citizen, from being walked over and controlled by a government suspicious of its own citizens. Innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around." this is true. The government must acquire a warrant to obtain things like this and break our right to privacy. I also agree with Jenny's comment "such as listening on a terrorists phone conversation then yes, tapping onto the phone is fine. If someone robbed a liquor store and is bragging about it to his friend then no, his phone shouldn't be tapped." There must be a solid reason to tap a phone, if the government has the evidence to get a warrant on a suspected terrorist thats good, but if its something minor thats not important and a waste of resources they should not.
In this issue I believe that unless the government gets an warrent to tap into your conversations they have no right to. Some people might have big issues with privacy and that might really bother them if there are people just listing to what they say, espesially if the government is wrong.. If people pay phone company's to handle there stuff then I would sue them if they gave out my information or let them listen in on me. I pay the phone company, not the government!!
I disagree with Nick. I believe in making America safe but I would be more comfortable losing some safety to have some basic human rights. People should not live in fear of being attacked because to me that is letting the terrorists get what they want. The terrorists would just love for our own government to turn on us and take away it's own citizens' rights. When the government skirts around the law by illegally wire tapping phones, they are becoming just like the corrupt and so called "evil" regimes and governments around that world that America condemns.
I disagree with Nick, I don't think that the government should be able to listen to anybodys phone conversations without a warrant. I know that terrorism is a huge threat to us today but that doesn't mean that innocent people should be accused of something that they didn't do. There are several other ways that our government can make sure that our country is safe besides invading people's privacy.
I do not believe the government has the right to listen into our conversations. It violates our right to privacy. They should not concern themselves with our personal conversations unless there is reason to. If a person is under great suspicion, then the government may listen in. The government should not be able to enter our private lives unless they have a reason and a warrant.
The lawsuit of the phone companies is a difficult topic. While it is your right to have privacy, you also are able to leave the phone company for one that does not allow wiretapping . Depending on how the government used the wiretapping allowed by the company would determine if I would carry out a lawsuit. I do not want the government abusing their power and entering my personal life without a probable cause to do so.
Haley Winckler here...
I think that phone tapping is very complicated in political issues. If the government is tapping phones and only looking for people who are saying keywords then it may not be very effective. I do not believe that the government has the right to tap any phones that they want. Now I believe that it would be an excellent idea to tap phone lines of people that we suspect in terrorism attacks or other very dangerpus crimes (murder, sexual assult, rape, purposeful injure). They should try to pass a bill that would give the government the right to tap phones only on suspects and should have to get a type of warrant in which to do so. Also, I think that the biggest issue is that if the government is using this to track down terrorists, but instead they find a drug dealer and arrest him, this piece of evidence should not be used in a court of law. Overall, I have very mixed views about this topic.
In response to Megan...
I completely believe what you are saying. The government should either have very large restrictions on phone tapping or not be able to phone tap at all. Sometimes, people that do serious crimes get to go free because of lack of evidence. I am completely for phone tapping if it will get murders, assults, and terrorist acts done by particular people off the streets to keep our country safe. Great post Megan!!!
I am undeciced on this issue because there are good arguements supporting all sides. For the phone owners, they have a right to their privacy and the government should not invade their privacy unless they have probable cause or a warrant. However, the government should be able to listen in on converstions, but only those of suspected terrorist's(which would be probable cause) and not just anyone they feel like. As for the phone companies, they should not allow the government to tap phones without a warrant, but i can see why they would allow this, the government controls or regulates everything in some way or another, so naturaly they would do what the government tells them to do. I would say if you are going to sue your phone company for allowing the government to invade your privacy, then you should also sue the government for invading your privacy.
I do agree with Justin on how it shouldn't matter if the government is tapping in to your conversations unless you have something to hide. But i dont think that that is the real issue. i believe the real issue is that people's right to privacy is being violated, and that is why people especially those who have done nothing wrong are getting so worked up over this.
1. Does the U.S. government have the right to listen in on your phone conversations? If yes, why? If no, is there a situation where the government would have the right to listen in on your phone conversations?
Yes and no, if they have suspicion of someone with a bomb then yes, but they must have really reasonable doubt and proof that that is what they were really “tapping in” for. No, because I’m sure they could tap in at any time and no one would even know. I think that if they did actually do this they should make sure the people on the phone would know for example: two people are talking on the phone planning to bomb a plane. The U.S. government should tap in or whatever and have a thing that says, “This is a United States federal government phone tapping. we have a warrant and are legally able to do this, and you may be arrested for what is going on.” Or something like that so that people wouldn’t bring it to court as soon as this all started happening.
2. If your phone company allows the government to wiretap your phone without a warrant do you think you should have the right to sue your phone company? Why? Should other people have this right?
No. Because it is not the phone company doing it, its the government. You have the right to not them tap your phone by simply not owning a phone or get a prepaid phone because I don’t think that cops can track those. I don’t think anyone has the right to sue the phone company because they are providing the service not how you talk on it, who you talk to on it, or what you are discussing.
To Sam Jones
I agree with you on how the government doesn’t have the right to listen to your phone calls, but that it would be an exception if you had a warrant. I don’t think you should sue your phone company because I don’t think you see this as what it’s for. This plan isn’t to track people down and make their lives terrible. It’s tohelp protect american citizens from terrorism. For example: what if the government had been tapping phones before 9/11? Maybe they would have heard tips and suggestions that saw it coming and to prevent it form ever happening? But it did happen and no one knew that it was going to so although it’s our privacy they are invading, it’s also our lives they could be saving.
I agree with Meghan. The government should not be invading our privacy unless they have an extremely good reason. And if they really have evidence that someone is doing something dangerous getting a warrant wouldn’t really be that difficult.
I dont care if the government listens in on my phone conversations. I'm not saying anything incriminating and i'll never know it happened. Also, with hundreds of millions of citizens making lots of phone calls per day, the government won't listen in on my conversations. Even though the government doesn't have to state a reason, they'll have to have some sort of reason to narrow down the people they'll be listening too. You can talk about privacy laws and search warrants all you want, but this is an extremely small right to give up and the government won't be listening in on your phone calls without a warrant, they have more important people to listen in on.
The phone company should not be accountable for allowing the government to listen in on your phone calls, they're just cooperating with the government. If you're going to sue someone in that situation, sue the government.
In response to Spencers post, I disagree completely. For one, if you're implying that all peole the government is listening in on has the same rights as U.S. citizens, that's just false. If they're not a U.S. citizen then under the U.S. they don't have the same constitutional rights that we do. Also, it is impossible for the government to listen in all the time. They're not going to spend days listening to the average U.S. citizens daily conversations and they definitely can't listen in on everyones conversation.
I agree with kenny. It's a complicated issue, but the FBI should only tap suspects not just anyone they choose. As americans we have the right to privacy.
I think that the Government shouldn’t have the right to listen in on your phone conversations. In the Washington post article by Dan Eggen I agree with Cheney that we should not punish those who help the Government in tracking terrorist. I think that we should find something that can be made like a computer system that picks up on certain words and if those words resemble something that would have an attack then if would send a message to someone and then they should be able to listen in, but I don’t think that they should be able to listen in. If the phone company is asked by the government to tap into you line I think that you shouldn’t sue the phone company they are just doing what the higher law wants them to. The ones you should be mad at is the Government.
I think that if they FBI has probable cause for a wiretap on a suspect then it is within their right to tap the suspect's phone. This means that they get a warrant and then tap the phone, warrants are used to secure the rights of the suspect and privacy of innocent people, who should have their private calls unmonitored, unless there is a warrant.
I believe that the government should not be allowed to wiretap our phones without a warrent because it violates our right to privacy. The government must aquire a search warrent to obtain permission to listen to our phone conversations. The phone companies has the right to refuse the government permission to listen to our converstions without a warrent. The government should not control every that we do. Privacy, while not a written down bit of legislation is it an implied right in the constitution.
I disagree strongly with Nick's response to Krystina. It is deffinatly very uncommon for people to plot teorrorist attacks on the USA. That is the media overreacting to each event. I agree with Jake, though, that if the government has enough reason to moniter your phone calls, then they should have enough reason to get a warrent to moniter your phone calls. The government has a constitutional obligation to moniter your phone calls if you are a suspected terrorist, but you are inocent until proven guilty.
I don't think the government should be able to tap phones unless they have a warrant or serious suspicion about something that is a danger to people.I don't think the phone companies should be held responsible for this action unless they can tell the government no. But for them to just be listening to conversations would violate our right to privacy.
I agree with Meghan that the government should only be able to listen to your phone conversation if they have a search warrant.
I disagree with Justin Haugesag when he said "If you are not a terrorist or not doing anything illegal, then you don't have anything to worry about." It's not that there is anything to hide, it's the pricipal of the situation. Even if you're not doing anything wrong the thought of someone listening in on a phone conversation seems very wrong to me.
I think that if it is going to be legal at all that wiretapping should only be used in cases of terrorism and when it would save peoples lives from a terrorist attack.It would be a violation of a persons privacy but as long as it is done in good faith to help save lives it should be okay.
It is not the fault of the phone company because if the government asks to tap a phone line they cant tell them no and you would not have a good case even if you were to sue them.
I feel that judges should be elected and not appointed because that way the people that will be effected by the judges decisions have a say in the person that will make decisions that could seriously effect peoples lives.
I also feel that if a judge is elected into his position then he should be able to be voted out if he is not doing his job up to the standards of the people.
I do not believe the government has the right to listen in on phone conversations without a proper warrant issued by a US judge. All information traveling through phone lines is technically your property and no US authority is allowed to search your property without a warrant. Phone companies should not be held responsible for denying government offices access to your property without a warrant and a citizen should reserve the right to sue his or her provider if this responsibility is broken.
The only time that i believe the government should be able to tap into peoples phone conversations is if they have a very reasonable suspicion that the person is a terrorist or wanted person. If they were to tap into a innocent persons phone conversation, not only would they be wasting their time, but also they would be invading that persons privacy for no reason at all. No one would be happy if they knew that the government was listening on their phone conversations, so it shouldn't happen unless they have a very reasonable suspicion.
i agree with what connor said and that the government does not have the right to violate your constitutional rights and your privacy is included in that.At least they should have to get a warrant of some kind in order to listen to your calls which would involve some probable cause.
Post a Comment