Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
No Government Surveillance
Transcript of No Government Surveillance
Evidence 1.) Surveillance has not been effective.
Terrorist are not motivated by video cameras. Even if there are video cameras watching, it would not stop the terrorist attacks that have been active in America.
Government Surveillance is bad and should be reduced.
By: Marissa Pardue
After 9-11, the government started a surveillance program, and they started tapping in on phone calls, and hacking their computers, and intercepting emails. Some people argue with this because it is going against their rights, with freedom of speech, and crossing into their privacy. Others argue with this because it can protect our country and look out to keep our nation safe.
Surveillance is expensive
Surveillance will make people more reserved.
Should government surveillance be reduced?
With Extensive video surveillance, it sucks up about 20% of the nation's criminal justice budget.
When people find out the armed government is watching, they will be more careful to what they do, read or even how they dress.
Evidence: See where and to peoples' calls go out. Terrorists call from phones with certain area codes. We would be able to see where calls are going to and coming out of.
Refutation: Even though we can see where calls come out of, we still arent certain they are planning on doing an act of terrorism.
Sulmasy, Glenn, A. Why We Need government surveillance. CNN. CNN. Feb-2013. Web 11-2015
Richards, Neil, M. "The Dangers of Government Surveillance" Harvard Law. June-2013. Web Dec 2015.
Aclu. "What's wrong with government surveillance" CNN. Web 2013- Dec.