Violating Our Privacy for Our Protection

The specter of terrorism has changed our lifestyles and threatens the civil

liberties that we hold dear. Governments admit that they could not fight

terrorists in a conventional manner and therefore, fighting back would require

unconventional means. An article in Newsweek explained it articulately that a

president will almost always choose to violate individual rights over the risk

of losing a war (Thomas & Klaidman, 2006). That article further illustrated

that when the United States experienced national crises, its presidents

exercisedpowers that may be reminiscent of communist authoritarian states.

When the Civil War broke out in 1861, Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas

corpus; World War I, Woodrow Wilson allowed officials to prosecute anyone

criticizing the government; World War II is noted for the FBI wiretapping and

unlawful detention of Japanese-Americans. Critics of the Bush administration

has already insinuated that our e-mail accounts may not be safe with the

National Security Agency (NSA) “googling” us through its data-mining

supercomputers.

Invading our privacy without warrants- supposedly to protect us from the

terrorists in our midst- is never justifiable. If you want to protect us, do so by

not violating us. The very foundation of democratic nations has been the civil

liberties that its citizens enjoy. Primary among these is the assurance to the

citizens of their right to be secure in their homes and persons. Private e-mail

accounts among other personal spaces should be outside the sphere of

government, unless a warrant is issued, then it becomes a reasonable search

allowed by law. The Fourth amendment is categorical on this, “the right of

the people to be secure in their persons, house, papers, and effects, against

unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants

shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and

particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to

be seized (Lauren S. Bahr, Johnston, & Bloomfield, 2002) This does not follow

if you are using government or employer’s computers and networks on

government and/or business hours and has been forewarned about

prohibitions of private emailing within the premises. As Mark Rasch wrote

you have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" in the contents of e-mail you

send and receive at work, using a work computer, over a company supplied

network, where the company has a "business use only" policy, and an

employee monitoring policy that states that any communications may be

monitored? Think about it. Indeed, the policy will go further and says "users

have no expectation of privacy (Rasch, 2007).

Internet privacy is recognized as a protected interest under state common

law. In the context of e-mail and online privacy there are four torts of

potential importance: (1) violating a person’s isolation; (2) disclosure of

upsetting private facts; (3) making disclosures that characterize or portray a

person in a false light; and (4) using as person’s name or likeness without

permission (Bick, 2000).

Whatever the end or purpose of warrantless “googling”, government should

tread lightly considering the fundamental laws. Online programs can search

email accounts for pornographic materials and in the process scans every

person’s account. This does not violate anything considering that the

programs are not people. People who look at other people’s accounts for
homeland protection purposes could compromise a person as indicated in the

previous paragraph. If Rihanna’s police photo showing her battered face is

splashed all over town without her consent, who can prevent other people or

“law enforcers” looking over the emails from using your credit card numbers,

private photos, and even identity for their nefarious ends. If a terrorist is

caught at the expense of compromising thousands of non-terrorists, I would

rather prefer the long, tedious process of getting a warrant.

Works Cited
Bick, J. (2000). 101Things You Need to Know About Internet Law. New York
City: Three Rivers Press.

Lauren S. Bahr, E. D., Johnston, B., & Bloomfield, L. A. (2002). Collier's

Encyclopedia. New York: P. F. Collier.

Rasch, M. (2007, November 2). E-mail Privacy to Disappear. Retrieved

February 26, 2009, from Symantec: www.symantec.com

Thomas, E., & Klaidman, D. (2006, January 9). Full Speed Ahead. Newsweek ,
p. 14.