Government seeks to redefine privacy.?

Question

Should the definitation of privacy be changed in our country?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071111/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/terrorist_surveillance

Would this help our security or does it go to far in violating our rights?

Answer 1

Redefining privacy in a way that relys on the "good graces" of governement to protect your rights reduces our freedom Osama Bin Laden must ne very happy with our governments response to his attacks!.

Answer 2

It goes too far. And it's part of a trend that started in the 1980's when we found out that what Ronald Reagan meant when he said he was going to get Government off our backs, was that he was going to get it in our bedrooms--rooting through our sock drawers. Everyone has something they aren't proud of, and Governments become a lot more powerful if they are free to use it against their citizens. This isn't a single party issue. The next President, who will almost certainly be a Democrat, could use it to balance the budget by going after tax evaders and Corporate crime in a big way--Maybe even recover some of the money stolen by War Profiteers.

But more importantly, it plays into the hands of the terrorists. Terrorists love to see governments crack down on their citizens. It's the primary goal for their attacks. The more unrest and disruption they create, the less people trust their governments and the closer they come to victory.

Answer 3

No. The privacy of all should be regarded as it has been for years and that should include the reversal of the decision on the wire-tapings that the Bush administration pursued and successfully got Congress to okay. If privacy is changed, then security could technically become stronger, but civil liberties and property and all other forms of private rights will be infringed upon. Citizens should speak up and not allow privacy to change, or it will lead to a slippery slop of government controlling lives.

Answer 4

Hi, I am a brainwashed American citizen. I don't mind if our government has complete control over my life, and I don't mmind that I am the only one in this government/citizen relationship that is required to be transparent with any information regarding anything I do.

My government can do as they please, because I know that they would never do anything to harm me nor would they ever do anything that would effect me in a negative way.

My government is honest and sincere. They only want to save me from them there terrorist. I know, that's what they tell me.

I would really like it if the government could microchip all of us and have a central datacenter that monitors everything I do, everything that I buy, and everywhere that I go. That would make me the safest.

In fact if they could actually assign every citizen in the US their very own law enforcement officer that would be with them 24/7 to make sure that no one does anything wrong, then I would be the safest.

See, I can say this because I don't do anything wrong. And I trust my government and I know that they have no other agenda than to keep me safe. I am their top priority.

I love my government. They are the greatest.

Answer 5

slender mindedness. the rationalization California had the definition as a union between 2 consenting adults replaced into so people who stay collectively as associates ought to report joint tax returns. ninety p.c. of the hoopla would leave if the nationwide and State governments would basically not make marriage a call for to report a joint tax return.

Answer 6

I really doubt that the government intends on screening every single one of those AT&T calls/e-mails. Probably very few, if any, actually. Personally, unless you are a suspected terrorist or have ties with one, I don't think you have any reason to think your rights are being violated. If it helps make the country more secure that's fine with me. It wouldn't be the first time the definition of one our rights have changed. Look at what groups like the ACLU have done to change our right to free speech.

Answer 7

The government has already stripped citizens of the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. We need a Congress that stands up for the American people, and defends us from a corrupt executive branch. Unfortunately, that's not likely to happen with the current crop of fools in Washington.

Warrantless wiretapping and breaking into your house is something that only totalitarian regimes were supposed to do, wasn't it?

Answer 8

No. I support rooting out Radical Islam in this country. I just don't think that we should become a police state in order to do it.

Answer 9

" . . . it should mean that government and businesses properly safeguards people's private communications and financial information" . . . Trusting souls, aren't you?

Answer 10

i would agree with the article...i don't see how monitoring phones, e-mails, bank transactions, etc...is invasion of privacy...its not like they are prying into our lives to exploit me...they are monitoring for terrorist or other illegal activities...just like i don't find it illegal if police patrol my area and sees who comes to my house or not...