Privacy concepts and applications

Privacy

The author of this report is to survey and review several different sources relating to privacy in the United States including two sets of laws on the book as well as some words from a private privacy rights advocacy group. In response to that first section, a contrarian viewpoint is to be asserted, defended and explained. While there is a definite need to monitor and police the communication airwaves, there is a difference between protecting/serving the public and encroaching too far onto privacy rights.

Laws & Reactions

One of the laws consulted for this brief report was the Telephone Records and Privacy Act of 2006. Basically, that law made it a crime to use surreptitious or deceptive means to obtain phone records about a person except when executed and committed by a law enforcement agency conducting a legitimate and authorized investigation. The law was seen as a direct reaction and response to the actions undertaken during the corporate spying scandal that unfolded at Hewlett Packard that same year (Jurist, 2007). While law enforcement should always have the ability to use means to investigate people, flatly banning the practice outside of law enforcement is probably bridge too far. The reason for that is because people breaking the laws and not following the rules should be allowed to be victims of their own folly. Hewlett Packard could and should have cleaned up their mess in-house and there was no need for law enforcement to get involved. The Wiretap Act is also questionable because a person should truly be held responsible for what they say and they shouldn't be able to hide solely behind rules of evidence to get away with dirty deeds. Organizations like PrivacyRights.org may disagree, but holding one's self to strict rules when it's obvious that the other side is not playing fair is just silly.

However, there is a counterpoint that is indeed valid. When the National Security Agency (NSA) of the United States is collection information in bulk with no rhyme or reason to it, that can become too might quite quickly. While it is wise to keep an eye on chatter and look for key words, phrases and patterns, there is indeed rules of evidence and the needs for warrants in many cases and that should be respected. The United States should certainly keep an eye on international communications as they have a right and duty to do so but citizens who are behaving themselves should be left alone and not monitored. In addition, and especially in light of events like 9/11, people can get profiled and labeled as suspects with no rhyme or reason. Indeed, most Muslim terrorists are male Arabs from 18 to 34 but there are plenty of young Arab males who love the United States and/or are doing nothing illegal.