Willing to Give Up Privacy

¶ … willing to give up Privacy for Safety or Civil Liberties?

"We don't choose the things we believe in; they choose us."- Lamar Burgess

In the twenty-first century one of the most vital concerns with regards to the usage of technology is privacy. As a knee jerk reaction, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) is searching for the finest of resources and proposals to make the sharing of information more organized, proper and complete. These objectives can only be attained if the privacy is intact and the security is on high alert during the process of transferring of information, to preserve its well being of the personal information of the inhabitants of our country against the newly emerging technologies. The question, hence, that rises here is this: Are civil liberties or security more important than one's private lives? The fact of the matter is that past experience has shown that one aspect is always compromised for the achievement of the other. If privacy grows to be non-existent with the application of more advanced security or civil liberties protocols, then these protocols are not really fulfilling their purpose or leading to newer security threats or civil liberties violations. The answer might be in moderation -- which is perhaps why the debate is still ongoing as not many influential individuals can choose between one over the other in the long run. This paper will aim to discuss this very question in light of the actions taken by the U.S. government in the past as well as draw in opinions and viewpoints expressed in the movie "Minority Report."

Discussion

One recent movie that addresses these concerns is the Minority Report, starring Tom Cruise. The major subject of the Minority Report is rational argument of free will vs. Determinism. Now the query arises whether or not the future is set or will it change the future? Critic C.A. Wolski said that "At the outset, Minority Report... promises to mine some deep subject matter, to do with: do we possess free will or are we predestined to our fate?" But the query still remains whether the precogs' visions are right? James Berardinelli asked "is the Precogs' vision accurate, or has it in some way been tampered with? Perhaps Anderton isn't actually going to kill, but has been set up by a clever and knowledgeable criminal who wants him out of the way." According to the precog Agatha as Andersn can see his future, he can alter it as well i.e. Free Will (Huemer, 2009). If data sharing is really going to increase security, then the belief amongst many is -- knowing the future really helps enhance civil liberties at the price of tarnished privacy preferences and the death of free will. This could also lead to the abandonment of the right to choose and change one's mind.