Agree

by Ed Forester

Created on: November 11, 2007

America is approaching the time when privacy will be a thing of the past. Electronic devices in our cars, GPS and PCS telephones and law enforcement technology are coming together to create a reality in which any single person's movements can be tracked very easily. While there is no specific right to privacy enumerated as fundamental in the US Constitution, it is clear that privacy in our information era is coming to an end.

Consider this scenario: My car has a small dent in the front where another car tapped it, but it runs very well. I get in my car at 7:30am and drive to work. My car is equipped with computer technology from OnStar which tracks my movements. I also have in my possession a PCS technology mobile telephone which is turned on and is able to receive calls. On my way to work, I stop at a fast-food restaurant and purchase a large coffee; purchasing the coffee with a debit card which records the time and location of the transaction. I continue on my way to work and arrive at 7:55am. Tragically, just a few moments after I leave the fast-foot restaurant, a young girl is struck by a car and killed in a hit-and-run accident. Police arrive at the scene but do not have a suspect. The only lead in the case is an eye-witness at the restaurant who saw a car very similar to mine leaving the scene.

With the points above, a criminal investigation could be launched. First, I have a dent in my car which means I possibly collided with an object or person. Second, my OnStar computer will place me on the route in which the girl was struck and killed. Third, the bank card transaction record will place me at the scene where the crime took place. Fourth, a witness noticed a car similar to mine leaving the scene. With this information, even though I was in no way involved in the accident, a very strong circumstantial criminal case can be made against me. I was there; I was at the restaurant, and I may have been seen leaving the scene. It is all circumstantial, but it could force me to accept a plea deal despite my innocence rather than face the unpredictability of a jury trial.

My movements are not private. I cannot defend against a circumstantial criminal case. The police know my movements as do private corporations. While I am aware that a certain amount of social monitoring will prevent a lot of crime, it makes me a suspect when there is no reason to consider me as a suspect. This alarms me. If I am a law-abiding citizen and careful driver, why should I have to be concerned that someone is watching my movements? It is an issue of privacy. The presumption of innocence is fundamental to our legal rights under the US Constitution. Constant surveillance and monitoring of citizens is not reflective of a presumption of innocence. It reflects a presumption of guilt.

Consider also that due to the Patriot Act, all of our personal records are available to law enforcement authorities without a warrant. My personal movements can be tracked through my mobile telephone, through the computer in my car, through my computer use at work, my medical records, bank transactions, email, everything! My government, with good motives or bad motives, now has access to my personal thoughts, movements and communications without judicial oversight. This means abuse is not only possible, but likely. What happens when government has complete knowledge of it's populations actions and movements? What if a government becomes very activist and wishes to exert political (or otherwise) pressure on citizens who disagree with its policies?

Privacy is important because it is reflected in the intent of the Bill of Rights. The founders wanted to guarantee that citizens would be secure "in their papers" which means government officials have no right to investigate your private business unless law enforcement officials can convince a judge that a law has been broken or danger is imminent. That protection; the protection of due process has been abrogated by the Patriot Act. Evidence of the success of the Patriot Act can be seen in the application of warrantless searches, civil forfeiture and abuse of power by federal agencies in prosecuting white-collar criminals. Unknown by most Americans, the Patriot Act didn't do anything to assist authorities in preventing terror or arresting terrorists, it did do a lot toward erasing privacy and helping law enforcement agencies in prosecuting white-collar criminals.

So, what then must we do? There isn't much we can do. After 9/11, we collectively surrendered our privacy to the state. However, there are many activist organizations dedicated to rolling back the abuses of the Patriot Act. The fight isn't over yet.

Learn more about this author, Ed Forester.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.