The 9/11 attacks created a war on deciding whether or not citizens can have both absolute security or privacy. Security is far more invasive in order to investigate the personal lives of individuals. Some believe security at the expense of privacy is against the constitution. Others say security must come first in order to ensure the safety of the country. Must we have to give up one in order to have the other in absolute form? Since both security and privacy cannot coexist in their absolute forms, individuals must choose which one they want to be more dominant. Though privacy is important to everyone, most will agree that they would rather be safe than sorry.
Congress has created the Department of Homeland Security of unprecedented powers …show more content…
Their goal isn't to make money or emit trust among citizens, but rather to stop the criminals from doing bad things. It may sound strange punishing everyone in order to catch a few bad guys, but the government will argue that giving up some civil liberties are necessary to protect against the terrorist threats. In other words, there are situations where security overrules privacy. “So do statistics like this one: Last year, 127 million sensitive electronic and paper records (those containing Social Security numbers and the like) were hacked or lost—a nearly 650 percent increase in data breaches from the previous year” (Price 387). The agitation in security and privacy is not limited to law enforcement and individuals. However, there's a growing trend for courts and legislatures to recognize the employees right to workplace privacy. In a recent case, a court found that a company was forbidden to look at an employee's e-mail if it's labeled "personal." If this trend continues, it will put companies in a lose-lose situation where they will be apparent to accountability to whether or not they advise employee activity. Most of these conflicts can be avoided if each situation was analyzed from both a privacy and a security perspective, but we cannot have both as an
Congress has created the Department of Homeland Security of unprecedented powers …show more content…
Their goal isn't to make money or emit trust among citizens, but rather to stop the criminals from doing bad things. It may sound strange punishing everyone in order to catch a few bad guys, but the government will argue that giving up some civil liberties are necessary to protect against the terrorist threats. In other words, there are situations where security overrules privacy. “So do statistics like this one: Last year, 127 million sensitive electronic and paper records (those containing Social Security numbers and the like) were hacked or lost—a nearly 650 percent increase in data breaches from the previous year” (Price 387). The agitation in security and privacy is not limited to law enforcement and individuals. However, there's a growing trend for courts and legislatures to recognize the employees right to workplace privacy. In a recent case, a court found that a company was forbidden to look at an employee's e-mail if it's labeled "personal." If this trend continues, it will put companies in a lose-lose situation where they will be apparent to accountability to whether or not they advise employee activity. Most of these conflicts can be avoided if each situation was analyzed from both a privacy and a security perspective, but we cannot have both as an