To begin, the government should not be permitted to use surveillance on its citizens because it violates the constitution. According to a series of secret court orders issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, “the NSA effectively granted itself unrestricted access to every American’s complete phone and Internet records, all without any independent oversight.” This means that American citizens are being violated of their right to freedom of speech guaranteed by the constitution. This goes against what the United States stands for, and is unfair to citizens. Additionally, in the article Actually, Most Countries Are Increasingly Spying on Their Citizens, the UN Says by Olga Khazan “countless other Western nations engage in similar
…show more content…
According to Facial-recognition technology seems to unfairly target minorities by Sam Levin “The FBI’s own numbers that 1 out of 7 The FBI’s own numbers suggest that 1 out of every 7 searches of its facial-recognition database fails to turn up a correct match.” In other words the software produces 50 inaccurate suspects that can be penalized for a crime they did not commit. Also, in London there are thousands of security cameras. Many would think this would aid in law enforcement but according to After Boston: The pros and cons of surveillance cameras , “In 2008, only one crime was solved for every 1,000 cameras, according to the city's police.” In other words, the thousands of dollars that were spent on cameras barely managed to solve a few …show more content…
However, some believe that the government should be permitted to use surveillance on its citizens; however, the evidence will show that this is not the case. Author Olga Khazan from the article Actually, Most Countries Are Increasingly Spying on Their Citizens, the UN Says, she states that “[The] data [is] storable, accessible and searchable, and their disclosure to and use by State authorities are largely unregulated.” This means that anyone can access the data gathered from citizens and other people around the world, violating their
According to Facial-recognition technology seems to unfairly target minorities by Sam Levin “The FBI’s own numbers that 1 out of 7 The FBI’s own numbers suggest that 1 out of every 7 searches of its facial-recognition database fails to turn up a correct match.” In other words the software produces 50 inaccurate suspects that can be penalized for a crime they did not commit. Also, in London there are thousands of security cameras. Many would think this would aid in law enforcement but according to After Boston: The pros and cons of surveillance cameras , “In 2008, only one crime was solved for every 1,000 cameras, according to the city's police.” In other words, the thousands of dollars that were spent on cameras barely managed to solve a few …show more content…
However, some believe that the government should be permitted to use surveillance on its citizens; however, the evidence will show that this is not the case. Author Olga Khazan from the article Actually, Most Countries Are Increasingly Spying on Their Citizens, the UN Says, she states that “[The] data [is] storable, accessible and searchable, and their disclosure to and use by State authorities are largely unregulated.” This means that anyone can access the data gathered from citizens and other people around the world, violating their