Privacy Expectations

This is an article I wrote for my Political Science class. It was titled 9/11: Five Years Later (wouldn't have been my choice).

My expectation of privacy from the government since 9/11 has not changed much since before that date. On the morning of September 11, 2001, I took a physical fitness test. It was to be the last one I would take in the U.S. Army. After four years of service, I was looking forward to getting out and going to college. At about the time the first plane hit the North Tower (8:46 a.m. EST), I was probably performing the sit-up portion of my test, after which was the 2-mile run. When we all got back to the office, the television was on and it didn't turn off for at least the next four months. We watched the towers fall, Enron collapse, and the bombings begin. I spent days upon days in the office up until I got out, and I had no privacy in the Army; I don't expect any now. Personally, I don't have anything to hide and if the government needs to compromise the secrecy of my conversation to prevent further attacks, so be it.

Same goes for my Internet traffic. Sure, I download a few songs here and there illegally, and they might know that. But my peer-to-peer file sharing does not compromise national security. It could, in ways, but my use is very limited and I keep a good watch over my PC due to my occupation. It actually could be a bit legal for the government to collect information about my phone calls and Internet traffic, according to the Supreme Court decision in Bartnicki v. Vopper. The Supreme Court actually upheld the First Amendment protection, but a reporter mentioned that the conversations recorded were of public concern:

Because of this suit’s procedural posture, the Court accepts that the interception was unlawful and that respondents had reason to know that. Accordingly, the disclosures violated the statutes. In answering the remaining question whether the statutes’ application in such circumstances violates the First Amendment, the Court accepts respondents’ submissions that they played no part in the illegal interception, that their access to the information was obtained lawfully, and that the conversations dealt with a matter of public concern. Pp. 9—10. (Cornell Law School)

Matters of public concern could eventually take higher precedence than the First Amendment. As long as the listeners-in don't join the conversation, I couldn't care less. A machine probably wouldn't pick up on anything I have to say on the telephone anyway, especially since I am such a poor businessman that there's nothing critical I discuss to begin with.

Wow – I don' t have much more to say. This isn't an argument for me; I don' t care whether “Big Brother” listens to my conversations. I believe that my privacy should be protected from other people (neighbors, business competitors) and will stand up for that. But when the American government wants to tap the phone, inspect every packet that leaves my cable modem, and take a look in the house once per month to make sure we're not staging Jihad, it's okay with me.

However, if they use this voluntary breach of my privacy for other reasons, I do have a problem. Playing the 9/11 card in Iraq may have worked, but I have my limits. If agents visit my house looking for terrorists and ask where I got the money for the $7,000 in computer equipment when I only have $24,000 in annual taxable income (“Come with me, sir.”), there will be issues.

In all, I expect my privacy to be respected as I will respect the values and safety of the United States and its citizens/occupants. There will inevitably come another time in which America will think back to this level of privacy and will want to have not been so secretive to protect their personal image. Anyone's neighbor could be plotting to kill a vast number of people. One of the 9/11 hijackers lived in Georgia for a little bit.

I encourage Americans to give up a little bit of privacy. Swallow your pride, because your neighbor has the same rights – and it's very possible he one day could be on a plane yelling in another language as everyone speeds toward Earth...

References
The quote about Bartnicki v. Vopper came from Cornell Law School. It was in the syllabus of the case decision, available here. Some points were also taken from the Wikipedia article on Privacy, found there.