Discussion topic/Question

Your life is somewhere in a database

Many TV shows depict law enforcement personnel accessing readily accessible databases that contain all types of records about individuals -records about everything from address to telephone records to finances, insurance, and criminal history. The information you share with your bank, doctor, insurance agent, the TSA, ancestry kit companies, and on social media can make your life an open book. Here are some questions to address as you reflect on this: 1. Are you comfortable with giving away some of your privacy for increased security? Why or why not? How far would you let the government go in examining people's private lives? 2. How much access should we have to certain aspects of others' private lives? For example, should States share criminal databases? But should a database of people paroled or released for crimes be made public? Why or why not?

Peer's Discussion Post

Hello,

Privacy verses security Privacy and security exist in a delicate balance, with individuals often forced to compromise one for the other. I have personally grappled with this dilemma, especially when traveling. Governments justify extensive data collection by citing national security concerns, arguing that increased surveillance prevents terrorism, fraud, and cybercrime (Harris, 2019). For instance, the USA PATRIOT Act, enacted after the 9/11 attacks, expanded government surveillance powers, allowing agencies to access phone records, emails, and financial transactions without a warrant. While these measures have thwarted threats, they have also been criticized for infringing upon civil liberties.

I find myself willing to give up some privacy for security in certain situations. For example, I have no issue with airport security scanning my fingerprints or using facial recognition if it means ensuring the safety of flights. However, I do worry about the extent of data collection beyond explicit security threats. The Cambridge Analytica scandal demonstrated how personal data shared on social media could be exploited for political manipulation, highlighting the risks of widespread data accessibility (Cadwalladr & Graham-Harrison, 2018). I once received highly targeted political ads that made me question how much of my information had been accessed and used without my consent.

Despite security benefits, I believe there is a threshold beyond which government surveillance becomes intrusive. The Edward Snowden revelations about mass data collection by the National Security Agency (NSA) led to public outcry over warrantless surveillance (Lyon, 2018). Many argue that while individuals should accept limited privacy intrusions for security, there must be checks and balances to prevent abuse. I strongly agree that oversight mechanisms, such as requiring judicial approval for surveillance and ensuring data encryption, can mitigate risks while preserving security objectives.

Access to Private Information: Ethical and Legal Considerations The question of who should have access to personal data extends beyond government surveillance. Employers, landlords, and even neighbors increasingly use online databases to research individuals' backgrounds. While transparency can serve a protective function, excessive public access to personal records can lead to discrimination and stigmatization. I have seen this firsthand when a friend struggled to rent an apartment because of a minor legal infraction from years ago that was easily accessible online. Despite turning his life around, his past continued to haunt him.

One of the most contentious areas is the sharing of criminal records. Many states in the United States maintain shared criminal databases accessible by law enforcement agencies, improving cross-jurisdictional cooperation. However, public access to criminal records remains debated. Some argue that databases of convicted felons should be publicly available to protect communities, while others emphasize the need for rehabilitation and reintegration. For instance, Megan's Law mandates public disclosure of sex offenders' identities to protect communities (Levenson & Cotter, 2005). While effective in preventing recidivism, it has also led to instances of harassment and social ostracization, raising ethical concerns about the long-term consequences of public exposure. I understand the need for public safety, but I also recognize that a person should not be permanently defined by past mistakes. A middle ground could involve tiered access, where law enforcement and relevant institutions have full access to criminal records while the public can only access limited information based on the severity of the crime.

Conclusion Striking a balance between privacy and security remains a complex challenge in the digital age. While I may tolerate some privacy intrusions for enhanced security, unchecked surveillance poses significant ethical concerns. Similarly, public access to criminal records must be carefully managed to avoid unjust discrimination while maintaining public safety (Richards, 2020). As data-driven governance evolves, policies must prioritize transparency, oversight, and ethical considerations to ensure that security measures do not come at the expense of fundamental privacy rights. Through my own experiences and those of people around me, I have come to believe that privacy is a right that should not be surrendered lightly, and any compromise should be made with caution and proper regulation.

References Cadwalladr, C., & Graham-Harrison, E. (2018). The Cambridge Analytica files: The story that revealed Facebook's darkest secret. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/cambridge-analytica-files Harris, D. A. (2019). A citizen's guide to the criminal justice system. University of California Press. Levenson, J. S., & Cotter, L. P. (2005). The impact of sex offender residence restrictions: 1,000 feet from danger or one step from absurd? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49(2), 168-178. Lyon, D. (2018). The culture of surveillance: Watching as a way of life. Polity Press. Richards, N. M. (2020). Why privacy matters. Oxford University Press.

Respond to the "Peer's Discussion Post" above in not more than three paragraphs, agree or disagree, your responds must be supported byrelevant information. Prove the point you are making by a) citingexternal research, b) citing readings from the class content, or c) providing examples or personal experiences that are relevant and support your position on the topic. It is always better to begin your reflection on the topic by doing some research/reading, either a) or b) or both, before considering personal experience. Ask a question to further the discussion.