Criminology in the Future
Richard Temcho
Criminology CJA/314
October 18, 2015
Post 9/11 As times go by, new laws are enacted due to the changing political and sociology environment to fight and protect us from crimes. Since 9/11, there have been acts added like the U.S Patriot Act, The Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 and the Homeland Security Act of 2002. The U.S Patriot Act was enacted to help fight terrorism by the Bush Administration and had certain goals that were set to counteract terrorism. There has been some controversy of this act which does have some pros and cons. A few of the pros are, the ease of surveillance, which under this act made it easier and allows companies to have a clear division of labor between …show more content…
Assisted in law enforcement, it helped tear down barriers that would slow down or stop their investigations. Speed up investigations, Increased security measures, expanded intelligence collection, prevent attacks more quickly, help save funding costs to victims, provides safety to citizens, less impact to businesses, expansive titles and directives, Americans can gain deeper connections, and checks and balances in place, were some of the pros since enacting the U.S. Patriot Act. With this act also brought some cons like to much authority given to government. Many citizens felt like there was too much authority given over to the government because under this act, left and unchecked power resulting in the power of the government access to individuals financial records, medical history, internet usage, purchases, travel patterns or any activates that leaves a record, which now a days that is almost everything we do. A few of the reason why …show more content…
The FBI does not even have to show a reasonable suspicion that the records are related to criminal activity, much less the requirement for "probable cause" that is listed in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. All the government needs to do is make the broad assertion that the request is related to an ongoing terrorism or foreign intelligence investigation. Judicial oversight of these new powers is essentially non-existent. The government must only certify to a judge - with no need for evidence or proof - that such a search meets the statute's broad criteria, and the judge does not even have the authority to reject the application. Surveillance orders can be based in part on a person's First Amendment activities, such as the books they read, the Web sites they visit, or a letter to the editor they have written. A person or organization forced to turn over records is prohibited from disclosing the search to anyone. As a result of this gag order, the subjects of surveillance never even find out that their personal records have been examined by the government. That undercuts an important check and balance on this power: the ability of individuals to challenge illegitimate searches”. (ACLU.org
Richard Temcho
Criminology CJA/314
October 18, 2015
Post 9/11 As times go by, new laws are enacted due to the changing political and sociology environment to fight and protect us from crimes. Since 9/11, there have been acts added like the U.S Patriot Act, The Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 and the Homeland Security Act of 2002. The U.S Patriot Act was enacted to help fight terrorism by the Bush Administration and had certain goals that were set to counteract terrorism. There has been some controversy of this act which does have some pros and cons. A few of the pros are, the ease of surveillance, which under this act made it easier and allows companies to have a clear division of labor between …show more content…
Assisted in law enforcement, it helped tear down barriers that would slow down or stop their investigations. Speed up investigations, Increased security measures, expanded intelligence collection, prevent attacks more quickly, help save funding costs to victims, provides safety to citizens, less impact to businesses, expansive titles and directives, Americans can gain deeper connections, and checks and balances in place, were some of the pros since enacting the U.S. Patriot Act. With this act also brought some cons like to much authority given to government. Many citizens felt like there was too much authority given over to the government because under this act, left and unchecked power resulting in the power of the government access to individuals financial records, medical history, internet usage, purchases, travel patterns or any activates that leaves a record, which now a days that is almost everything we do. A few of the reason why …show more content…
The FBI does not even have to show a reasonable suspicion that the records are related to criminal activity, much less the requirement for "probable cause" that is listed in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. All the government needs to do is make the broad assertion that the request is related to an ongoing terrorism or foreign intelligence investigation. Judicial oversight of these new powers is essentially non-existent. The government must only certify to a judge - with no need for evidence or proof - that such a search meets the statute's broad criteria, and the judge does not even have the authority to reject the application. Surveillance orders can be based in part on a person's First Amendment activities, such as the books they read, the Web sites they visit, or a letter to the editor they have written. A person or organization forced to turn over records is prohibited from disclosing the search to anyone. As a result of this gag order, the subjects of surveillance never even find out that their personal records have been examined by the government. That undercuts an important check and balance on this power: the ability of individuals to challenge illegitimate searches”. (ACLU.org