There are many challenges that law enforcement agencies faces when it comes to enforcing public safety at the same time protect the rights of individuals. Balancing civil liberties and fighting terrorism is a delicate task that is affecting the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The focus is the of involvement relationship between public safety and individual rights. The first topic is the statutory authority and responsibilities of government officials, security personnel, and private citizens. The next topic involves the practices or laws relating to search, seizures, and surveillance by police, corrections, private citizens, and security personnel. This paper will also compare the laws relating to the use of force by police, corrections,
…show more content…
In their recommendations, the commission concluded that clandestine and unchecked power could cause untold abuses. Additionally, they concluded that abuse of power required some degree of Congressional checks, which led to the formation of FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act). The basis of FISA was that when the president wanted to target an American citizen to gather intelligence, he must first seek the permission of an independent judge in order to encroach on the privacy of the individual. It can be convincing to argue that when the president has powers to order the searching of homes, interception of communication and emails, the country is safer. However, this goes against the concept of a free of privacy society in which relative degrees of risk are taken in order to secure …show more content…
Some of the scandals that have shown that executive powers in the fight against terrorism can be abused include secret prisons abroad, communication interception and detainee abuse. Public mistrust that the fight against terrorism may be costing their civil liberties is justifiable when the government eavesdrops on their private conversations. The fourth amendment of the constitution clearly stipulates explicitly that persons have the right to be secure in their persons, papers and effects, and their rights against unreasonable searches and seizures must not be violated. Any official surveillance of international calls or emails of Americans within the U.S required an approval from FISC (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court), but there have been reports of government eavesdropping despite the presence of legal
In their recommendations, the commission concluded that clandestine and unchecked power could cause untold abuses. Additionally, they concluded that abuse of power required some degree of Congressional checks, which led to the formation of FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act). The basis of FISA was that when the president wanted to target an American citizen to gather intelligence, he must first seek the permission of an independent judge in order to encroach on the privacy of the individual. It can be convincing to argue that when the president has powers to order the searching of homes, interception of communication and emails, the country is safer. However, this goes against the concept of a free of privacy society in which relative degrees of risk are taken in order to secure …show more content…
Some of the scandals that have shown that executive powers in the fight against terrorism can be abused include secret prisons abroad, communication interception and detainee abuse. Public mistrust that the fight against terrorism may be costing their civil liberties is justifiable when the government eavesdrops on their private conversations. The fourth amendment of the constitution clearly stipulates explicitly that persons have the right to be secure in their persons, papers and effects, and their rights against unreasonable searches and seizures must not be violated. Any official surveillance of international calls or emails of Americans within the U.S required an approval from FISC (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court), but there have been reports of government eavesdropping despite the presence of legal