how is this paper? I still need a conclusion. It is only rough draft.?

Question

The Idea of American Injustice

Just six weeks after the September 11th attacks on the world Trade Center and the Pentagon, Congress passed the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act gives investigators the power to spy on its own citizens. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11th and the Patriot Act, the rights of citizens of the United States and prisoners being held in camps such as Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib have been violated by the United States breaking the Geneva Convention. The idea of American justice is slowly becoming the idea of American injustice.
So what is the Patriot Act and what does it give investigators the power to do? The Patriot Act allows investigators to wiretap phone lines, do a search called a “sneak and peak”, which allows investigators not have to obtain warrants, search a home and tell the person after they have searched their home. The Patriot Act also allows investigators to obtain personal information (books taken from library, every type of purchase, etc.). A website made by the Department of Justice, www.lifeandliberty.org, states that the Patriot Act has prevented another attack on America since September 11th, 2001 (Preserving 519). Indeed, the Patriot Act has likely prevented another terrorist attack, but at the cost of our constitutional rights?
The Patriot Act violated the rights given to us by the Constitution, mainly the First and Fourth Amendment. The First Amendment is nonexistent since the Patriot Act was passed. Investigators can wiretap phone lines and go into our personal life and look at books we’ve read and things we bought. This totally ruins the foundations laid out by the First Amendment, which gives us our freedoms (religion, speech, press, right to petition and assembly) that have since been taken away from us. The “sneak and peak” which was earlier mentioned and part of the patriot Act violated the rights given to us by the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment gives people the right against unreasonable searches of homes, warrants must be obtained to search home, and the person must be notified that their house is being searched. With the “sneak and peak”, investigators are allowed to go into a house without a warrant and also can go into a house without giving notice to people whose things have been searched (Surveillance 521).
With the War on Terror in full swing, we are trying the best we can to capture terrorists and obtain information vital for us to remain safe in the United States. We hold these “suspected” terrorists in prison camps such as Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. But, are the troops and investigators overseas following the Geneva Convention, signed in 1949?
The Geneva Convention protects prisoners of war. Prisoners must be treated like humans and must be protected against acts of violence. In 2003, two detainees in an Afghan interrogation facility were killed. They were found with “blunt” injuries to the legs and lower body. Eighteen months has passed and there has yet to be a full military investigation (Barry 549). At the time, Donald Rumsfeld said that the Geneva Conventions are being followed by the United States but continued to state that “the Geneva Conventions rules do not necessarily mean that all detainees will get all the rights and privileges normally accorded prisoners of war” (549). So why don’t they get the same rights that all prisoners should be allowed to have? Investigators are using torture and violence to force prisoners to tell them things they want to hear. They believe they are doing what is best for the country. In their minds, in order to protect the country they need to use any kind of force possible to get these terrorists to speak, or America may be attacked again.

college english paper

Answer 1

The paper is fairly well presented. I disagree with the theme and tone but that isn't what you asked.

Your points are generally well-argued except for the claim that "The First Amendment is nonexistent since the Patriot Act was passed." The First Amendment says Congress shall make no laws abridging the freedoms you list. It does not say Congress shall plug its ears when we speak. In other words, the FACT that the government can listen in on conversations does not, of itself, deprive us of a right guaranteed by the First Amendment. I think you would have to try to argue that because of governmental intrusion, people are afraid to speak; or people have otherwise been prohibited from stating an opinion. The fact that you are writing this paper goes against that argument.

You may be better off leaving the First Amendment out and arguing the Fifth (due process) and Sixth (right to counsel) Amendments are being violated. Your Fourth Amendment claim is better laid out.

I think your paper may be stronger if you find another word or phrase for "investigators." Your point is that the Government is violating our rights. Stick with that. Unless you say "the Government" or "Government investigators" you weaken the impact of your argument. Using the term "investigators" lets the reader forget it's the government doing this. Don't let Big Brother off the hook.

Will your conclusion be a call to action to repeal the Patriot Act? WIll you suggest an alternative? You don't seem to contest the assertion that the Patriot Act has prevented further terrorist attacks. Will you conclude that terrorist attacks are a lesser evil than the loss of personal freedom by the Patriot Act?

You've done a good job writing this paper and I'd love to read it when completed.

Answer 2

Is this a high school level or college level paper?

I found this to be interesting reading, with good grammar and sentence structure. You are vocalizing the questions many in America have about the thin line between our safety and our freedoms.

You are right, you do need a conclusion. Good luck.

Answer 3

I thinks it's good. I remeber these school days. It's get worse too......

Great Job!