In The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution Of The United States of America, the Fourth Amendment states:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Under this amendment President Bush's use of the Patriot Act can be considered unconstitutional because it defies the rights described above. The key word is "unreasonable". Terrorism is very a serious matter and the prevention against terrorist attacks in our own country is by no means unreasonable. It is more than reasonable to do everything in our power to protect ourselves and our beliefs, it is essential. It is the job of the President and our government to protect the country. The Patriot Act is completely justified because it protects the ability for the people of America to be safe.
The Bill of Rights was made without knowledge of technology. Therefore it is hard to define under the Constitution, where the privacy of virtual property lies. Virtual property such as e-mail, phone conversations, pictures, and blogs are as personal as your pay checks. They deserve the same privacy privileges as ones home. But if the government had reason to check your home for terrorist activities, than they also have the right to check your phone calls and e-mails. If you have nothing to hide than why not let random people search for "hot" terms in your conversations. The problem with the patriot act is that it ideologically opposes the Constitution. If we as citizens are allow this, what else are we willing to let slide. Have we started down a slippery slope of apathy, where the government gradually gives itself more and more power? I believe it is possible but only time will truly tell.
I want to feel safe in my country. If I have to let someone listen into my conversations, so be it, maybe they will learn something from what I have to say. In desperate times, we are forced to make difficult decisions. If they do not listen to our phone calls than it will be more difficult to prevent terrorism in our country. Some would say that allowing such activities is an act of terrorism itself. Well, when choosing between terrorists my allegiance lies with the ones who are striving to protect me. If you are forced to decide between two bad options it is always better to take the less severe of the two. Security and Civil Liberty have to be balanced, there can not be too much or too little of either.
