Wednesday, January 15, 2014

President to Address NSA Surveillance

(article)

On Friday, President Obama is to address the country on the topic of the NSA's controversial surveillance methods. He is also expected to announce changes on some of the NSA's programs, including that which collects data from civilian phone calls. Obama has previously defended the NSA's programs, discussing the amount of lives which have been saved through them. While most of the federal government agrees with this idea, some say that the bulk of the information collected by the NSA is irrelevant to national security, therefore a violation of citizens' right to privacy. NSA surveillance has also proven to, statistically, play a minimal role in national security investigations; there are some that believe that their programs hardly affect the flow of terrorist activity at all, neither hindering nor aiding it--simply put, it's a waste of tax money, as it does virtually nothing to help the country.

Personally, I believe that NSA surveillance programs definitely need to be revised. A department which should work hard towards defending the country has proven to be inefficient and largely irrelevant in fighting terrorism. I don't believe that it's the right of any government to impede on our right as Americans to privacy; however, I understand the need if there's a just, probable cause. I believe that there should be an extended process to undergo before the NSA taps into someone's phone, much like a search warrant.

3 comments:

  1. I do agree that the NSA's actions is going against American's right to privacy. On the other hand, I would hate to know that we could have potentially prevented a terrorist attack from happening if we have saved data from a random sample of Americans. Either way, I think the the Surveillance needs to be reformed in a way that is helpful, but not going against our right, if that is even possible.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with Hadley and Stacey. It is hard to find the right balance between allowing the surveillance for national security but not going too far in violating privacy rights.

    ReplyDelete
  3. i also agree. the right balance needs to be found

    ReplyDelete