In regards to believing if the Patriot Act should have "such a wide lattitude" - permitting the ability to conduct warrantless searches, electronic surveillances; and the ability to collect information from emails and internet trafficing, my personal answer is yes. For example, in terms of National Security, I believe the government should have the "means to monitor and identify individuals" that are linked to "terrorism". In fact, as a United States Veteran of the United States Marine Corps; and who has also served in the LE capacity [i.e. the law enforcment community], alot of my investigations were resolved - due to provisions of the United States Patriot Act.
For instance, on numerous occasions I would encounter criminals [i.e. who resided in multiple residences] that "made it difficult for me to track them". Because criminals …show more content…
Kantianism] is considered to be "deontological" because it holds that an action is "right", and in and of itself; without appeal to consequences. For instance, Kantianism would argue "that it's wrong to use individuals as a means to an end", as it's affect everybody holistically [i.e. in terms of morality]. And considering the United States Patriot Act allows "information to be collected on citizens" [i.e. whether they're innocent or criminals], it would be wrong for the United States Patriot Act to break "moral laws" - even if it's the "duty of law enforcment and federal agencies"; to prevent criminals and terrorists from harming society. Whereas, my ability to judge the United States Patriot Act [i.e. according to Kantianism] - including but not limited to understanding the concept of "implied rights vs. natural rights" [i.e. understanding the vagueness of the 4th amendment] and "how morals are intimately related to a nations government" [i.e. according to Aristotle and James Madison], I believe it is 100% ethical. And last but not least, it to explain to judge the ethics of
For instance, on numerous occasions I would encounter criminals [i.e. who resided in multiple residences] that "made it difficult for me to track them". Because criminals …show more content…
Kantianism] is considered to be "deontological" because it holds that an action is "right", and in and of itself; without appeal to consequences. For instance, Kantianism would argue "that it's wrong to use individuals as a means to an end", as it's affect everybody holistically [i.e. in terms of morality]. And considering the United States Patriot Act allows "information to be collected on citizens" [i.e. whether they're innocent or criminals], it would be wrong for the United States Patriot Act to break "moral laws" - even if it's the "duty of law enforcment and federal agencies"; to prevent criminals and terrorists from harming society. Whereas, my ability to judge the United States Patriot Act [i.e. according to Kantianism] - including but not limited to understanding the concept of "implied rights vs. natural rights" [i.e. understanding the vagueness of the 4th amendment] and "how morals are intimately related to a nations government" [i.e. according to Aristotle and James Madison], I believe it is 100% ethical. And last but not least, it to explain to judge the ethics of