National Security v. Civil Liberties (Raby)

National Security v. Civil Liberties

National Security v. Civil Liberties

by Nicole Kurdziel -
Number of replies: 7

I do agree with the quote because the world is changing, and the government's security has to change also. The world is now technology and data based. The older methods of secret agents dressed in their Sherlock Homes hats and trench coats are gone. The government focuses on finding terrorits and creating a more efficent way of rooting them out - the internet and communication. Since people communicate around the world, there can be increased activity going on. The Patriot Act simply expands upon the government's powers to track crime. The Patriot Act also punishes terrorist activity harsher than before. 

Although I do agree with the quote, that doesn't mean I agree with the terms in which the government follows through with it. The data mining is necessary, but keeping the non vital records are not. What I mean here is when the government sifts through the key words and nothing of suspicion is found, then the information should be erased. The Patriot Act mentions the government must do what's necessary, but standards for data mining aren't exactly covered. Overall, I think the government is protecting our security, but the protocol in which they do is questionable. 

In reply to Nicole Kurdziel

Re: National Security v. Civil Liberties

by Courtney Gillis -

I agree with you about the terms and the governments actions being questionable. I think the government went to far with sifting through information and they need to be careful about who is "uncoding" the messages. People make mistakes, but I think it's important for the government to be aware of their hunches.

In reply to Nicole Kurdziel

Re: National Security v. Civil Liberties

by Zachary Kubiak -

I agree with this.  Terrorists are smart as well and try many tactics to harm us.  The Patriot Act helps our country.

In reply to Nicole Kurdziel

Re: National Security v. Civil Liberties

by Sabrina Holbrook -

I agree with you. The point that I agree with you most is when you said "the world is changing, and the goverment's security has to change also." Everything is done invlovling some type of technoligy these days and thats now the best way to track whos is where and what they are doing.

In reply to Nicole Kurdziel

Re: National Security v. Civil Liberties

by Kelsey Griffin -

You're right, the world is evolving, and very quickly if you think about it. The Patriot Act is helpful in our efforts to track crime, but I guess I really didn't think about all the non vital records they keep just for the heck of it. There really aren't many limitations to the Patriot Act.

In reply to Nicole Kurdziel

Re: National Security v. Civil Liberties

by Hunter Iuliano -

i would have to agree with you that the extra non needed information should be earsed.. its just wasting space for more valuable information to be stored. the goverment is truley looking out for us. the way the system is acted upon could use some work.

In reply to Nicole Kurdziel

Re: National Security v. Civil Liberties

by Logann Sade -

I agree with the your statement. The government is mostly focusing on tracking down terrorists and driving them away from our country. Ever since the event of 9/11 occured, it was a total wakeup call for the government.

In reply to Nicole Kurdziel

Re: National Security v. Civil Liberties

by Anthony McKinney -

I don't think the records should be erased immediately because it is difficult determining whether or not something relevant. Other than that, I do agree with your statement.