To oversimplify, matters surrounding privacy can be color coded. There are some issues that are very black and white related to the need to “violate” privacy. However, there are also quite a few gray areas where more research needs to be conducted and statistics gathered to formulate guidelines to determine when it is indeed necessary. Privacy in general needs to be treated in a way that is different from other rights and based on the serious consequences of not revealing facts that would be considered “private”.
The publication of Amitai Etzioni’s essay, “Less Privacy Is Good for Us (and You)”, clearly dates itself in talking about the prospect of “using driver’s licenses to curb illegal immigration” (Etzioni), especially in lieu of recent …show more content…
Breathtaking statistics remind Americans that “fifty-eight people were killed in the Las Vegas shooting. The Orlando nightclub shooting last year, 49. The 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, 32. The 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, 27. As of Sunday, November 5th, the fifth-deadliest mass shooting since World War II is the attack on a Baptist church in tiny Sutherland Springs, Tex., which killed 26 people” (Astor 2017). However terrible to say, it is no wonder why people have become accustomed to hearing tragedies of such caliber on the news. Of course, that doesn’t make it any less upsetting or case for finding closure faster than in other situations. What it does justify is the use of background checks; not being allowed to “purchase firearms without first presenting the proper government papers” (Etzioni), as mentioned earlier, and extra security measures, even if taken on “law-abiding citizens” (Garfinkel) which should not be received so sensitively because of their purpose of “[enhancing] the common good” (Etzioni). The United States we know today reported Columbine to have been “the first mass shooting in nearly eight years that killed 10 or more people”, which is clearly different than the United States of the past where “after 1999, seven years would pass without one. Today, such gaps are unthinkable. Five of the past six years have included at least one shooting with 10 or more casualties” (Astor
The publication of Amitai Etzioni’s essay, “Less Privacy Is Good for Us (and You)”, clearly dates itself in talking about the prospect of “using driver’s licenses to curb illegal immigration” (Etzioni), especially in lieu of recent …show more content…
Breathtaking statistics remind Americans that “fifty-eight people were killed in the Las Vegas shooting. The Orlando nightclub shooting last year, 49. The 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, 32. The 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, 27. As of Sunday, November 5th, the fifth-deadliest mass shooting since World War II is the attack on a Baptist church in tiny Sutherland Springs, Tex., which killed 26 people” (Astor 2017). However terrible to say, it is no wonder why people have become accustomed to hearing tragedies of such caliber on the news. Of course, that doesn’t make it any less upsetting or case for finding closure faster than in other situations. What it does justify is the use of background checks; not being allowed to “purchase firearms without first presenting the proper government papers” (Etzioni), as mentioned earlier, and extra security measures, even if taken on “law-abiding citizens” (Garfinkel) which should not be received so sensitively because of their purpose of “[enhancing] the common good” (Etzioni). The United States we know today reported Columbine to have been “the first mass shooting in nearly eight years that killed 10 or more people”, which is clearly different than the United States of the past where “after 1999, seven years would pass without one. Today, such gaps are unthinkable. Five of the past six years have included at least one shooting with 10 or more casualties” (Astor