The Pros and Cons of Domestic Surveillance

It is the duty of the government to ensure that it provides security for all its citizens irrespective of the differences in demographical characteristics. The government has been involved in different means through which the provision of security can become implemented one of which is domestic surveillance. Through this, the government has had the opportunity to stop a lot of terrorist attacks on the people including other security threats. However, the citizens have always been heard stating that this program infringes on some of their freedoms which are granted by the constitutions (Bambauer, 2013). The domestic surveillance debate has rocked the USA on whether it is ethical to have the government tapping and spying on its people. However, despite all these cries from the citizens, it is more important to have a safe and surviving nation and not to adhere to some freedom rights.

In every choice that an individual makes, they must be guided by ethics, having ethical values and the views of whether a particular decision is right or wrong will determine the outcome of the decisions that have been made (Mosser, 2013). Following the USA bombing attacks on September 11, 2001, the USA President at the time George Bush implemented a surveillance program by the NSA (Sugiyama et al., 2006). This was despite the fact that, various laws and agency policies had barred the surveillance program in the USA. After leaks emerged that the government was conducted illegal surveillance on its people without warrants, outcries from the citizens filled the nation and other international communities. The people claimed that the surveillance programs were infringing on their freedom rights of which the constitution mandated that they should become observed.

Domestic surveillance is a necessary discomfort in the USA whereby people only seem to see the small portion of the picture which they can understand and leave out the complex reality of why it is necessary. Despite the fact that domestic surveillance might invade the privacy of the people, it is essential to protecting the well-being and providing a safe living environment for the people. The primary purpose of domestic surveillance is collecting, processing and storing data belonging to the USA citizens for the good of the nation (Sugiyama et al., 2006). The bombings of 9/11 were an indication of just how the USA was vulnerable to attacks, and they sent fear amongst all the citizens. According to the utilitarianism ethical theory, the domestic surveillance programs are essential for its outcomes to produce the greatest good for a huge number of people (Marques, 2015). More than 250 million USA citizens are now living in a country that they can fully carry out their day to day activities without fearing for their lives. The protection of country’s citizens is more important than one individual’s freedom. What good will one's civil rights be if they are dead as a result of terror attacks or other insecurity occurrences. Through the domestic surveillance programs, the NSA has had the ability to stop numerous attacks such as Najibullah Zazi who had planned to bomb the New York Subway back in 2009. The NSA was able to trace the communication back to the Al-Qaeda extremists after only monitoring him for a short period.

There are no other effective means through which the USA citizens can become protected, more so, when it comes to dealing with terrorist. The use of interrogation and penetration at times might not help in protecting people from terror attacks. However, with surveillance, the terror attacks can become prevented even before they occur. For most of the terrorist, they have undergone numerous training that makes them not reveal any information after they are captured (Marques, 2015). The penetration of terrorist cells can also be catastrophic to the involved personnel once they are caught. This is evident from the fact that, there have been numerous videos posted online of USA soldiers being executed after terrorists have caught them. However, with surveillance, there is no need for losing any lives. The development of modern means of communication has made it possible for a different terrorist to communicate all over the world. The domestic surveillance program allows for this communication to become monitored and the people involved are apprehended. In the long run, all the USA citizens are protected, and they can continue to enjoy their civil liberties without having any fear.

In the ethical theory of deontology, an individual; looks at the reason behind an action and the rule for which one chooses to act (Misslebrook, 2013). According to this ethical theory, it argues the fact that consequences should not play any role in evaluating the morality of an act. However, it does not deny the fact that consequences will not occur and they are important also. According to the deontological theory, the citizens have a right to enjoy their civil liberties, of which it is the duty of the government to ensure it observes the rights. However, according to Kant’s deontology, there are certain actions that an individual might undertake even though they might be wrong (Misslebrook, 2013). In this case, domestic surveillance might infringe on the right of the people; however, it is necessary. This is similar to a situation whereby, even though it might be morally wrong to shoot an intruder and kill him/her, it is still the duty of the individual to protect his/her family. In this case, it is the duty of the government to ensure that it provides security for all its citizens despite the means that will be used.

So as to keep the public safe, the government is scaling up its domestic surveillance programs. The main reason behind such initiatives is since, over the years, there has been a tremendous increase in communication technology which makes it hard for individual bugging of phone lines and having in place people who will go over the intercepted communication. However, through surveillance, the millions of communication that occur daily have the ability to be amassed, and analysis is carried out whereby anomalies and patterns that indicate any threat become weeded out. However, in implementing such programs so will the privacy of the people continue to be compromised. No middle ground can be found between confidentiality and security for one of the two will have to be given up so as to increase the other (Bambauer, 2013). For most of the USA citizens, they will end up choosing privacy over security, and this is evident from the protest that has occurred over the years since the Snowden revelations on domestic surveillance programs (Bambauer, 2013). Being a debate that can never find common ground, the USA government has instead opted to carry out the surveillance programs without consulting the people or seeking warrants.

Egoism can be seen as self-ism and from an ethical perspective, self-interest indicates that human beings should only act in a manner that will benefit and interest them in the long run (Tibor, 2013). This is different from altruism which indicates that an individual’s actions should always be directed towards helping others. Before the 9/11 bombings in the USA, surveillance programs were prohibited by not only the public but also the laws (Sugiyama et al., 2006). This is an indication that the USA did not need such programs in providing security for its people. Even before these attacks, the USA was amongst the world's superpowers, and no nation could overcome its military strength. However, after 9/11, it was an indication of just how the USA was vulnerable to attacks as compared to other nations not considered as being superpowers.

The increased technological advancements in communication and internet have increased the potential threats against the USA. As such, it was only through surveillance programs could the USA monitors and have the ability to stop such future attacks. With the domestic surveillance program enacted a year later after the Patriotic Act of October 26, 2001, it was an indication of the USA's stand about terrorism for the NSA began data mining (Sugiyama et al., 2006). The surveillance programs were mainly for the interest of the USA government for it did not involve the citizens. The government wanted to ensure that it had tapped all communication for its citizens so that it would not face shame again (Tibor, 2013). Botching more terror attempts on the USA would build the confidence the government by the people and would put the USA on the world map. Having a safe nation would ensure that the USA continues to grow economically for more investors would set up business in the country.

The issue of security vs. privacy will continue to be debated in the USA and other countries around the globe that will adopt the domestic surveillance programs. For most citizens, they have come to see the local surveillance programs as being an infringement of their civil liberties (Bambauer, 2013). However, what good will be having these rights is in case people continue to lose their loved ones as a result of insecurity in the country. Having a more secure country in which people can carry out their day to day activities without fear is much better than having rights of which one cannot fully enjoy them. As such, the ethicality of the surveillance program will continue to raise tensions between the government and its people until when a common ground will be found on security vs. privacy.

References

Bambauer, D. E. (2013). Privacy versus security. J. Crim. L. & Criminology , 103 , 667.

Marques, J. (2015). Universalism and utilitarianism: An evaluation of two popular moral theories in business decision making. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership , 8 (2), 3.

Misselbrook, D. (2013). Duty, Kant, and deontology. Br J Gen Pract , 63 (609), 211-211.

Mosser, K. (2013). Ethics and social responsibility (2nd Ed.) [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/.

Sugiyama, T. M. & Perry, M. (2006). The NSA domestic surveillance program: An analysis of congressional oversight during an era of one-party rule. U. Mich. JL Reform , 40 , 149.

Tibor, M. R. (2013). Self-Interest, egoism, and business. Advances in Management , 6 (10), 5.