Is it moally acceptable for government agencies (NSA, CIA FBI) to Essay

Is it moally acceptable for government agencies (NSA, CIA FBI) to eavesdrop on domestic phone calls or intercept emails of its c - Essay ExampleFor this exercise to be acceptable by all bodies involved, the bodies conducting the eavesdropping had to obtain a endorsement from the United States Foreign surveillance Court. This could fall in legalized the whole exercise and no questions could have arisen from the different bodies that raised their concerns (Risen 19). Many laws against this make for have been formulated. These include the wireless telegraphy act 2006 and the pattern of investigatory powers act 2000. Although this act of intercepting emails is good for the security of the country, the bodies conducting the interception should look, for a warranty, to do the same. The N.S.A, F.B.I together with C.I.A, argue that taking of warranties will alert the potential terrorists and the search would not be effective. This essay outlines the reasons why use of unwarranted emails eavesdropping is not good (Bamford 145). First is the fact that this is a breach of civil liberty. Individuals are supposed to be covered under civil rights, which gives them freedom to do what is legally right to the extent that they do not interfere with different peoples lifetime (Radden 19). The act of eavesdropping on emails and phone calls is a violation of human rights to expression, interaction, and speech. These laws cover individuals enabling them to interact and communicate freely without others getting concerned about other individuals conversation. In addition to this, confrontation of individuals to know whom they were communicating with is a violation of human rights. The security department needs to show proof of a warranty to eavesdrop someones emails and a warranty authorizing interviews in regard to the messages intercepted (Radden 64). The act of eavesdropping is a violation of the privacy policy of the company providing the conversation (Janczewski and Colar ik 128). Companies providing communication services always have privacy policies by which they are supposed to abide. They are supposed to ensure that no third party individual encounters the limit of the message unless warranted officially by the government. It is the right of an individual to sue any company that allows third party individuals to get the contents of his emails without an official warranty (Radden 59). The act of eavesdropping can as well cause safety issues to the contents of the message. Certain email messages and calls are supposed to be private and confidential. Such emails explaining or having pecuniary discussions can easily be decrypted, and the information be used in a bad way so that the money is diverted (Bamford 125). This is very achievable within the security bodies N.S.A, F.B.I and C.I.A simply because the agencies have employees of varied nature. Individuals who can use such advantage to divert the monetary value of the emails and calls to his acco unt exist. This can be very disappointing to the individual and all the people associated with the transaction. The fact that the interception of the emails is not warranted would make individuals have the privilege of going around the issue without fear from flirt orders and imprisonment (Janczewski and Colarik 91). It can also be difficult to know the exact person that conducted the transfer of the monetary contents from the email. This is because individuals with the capability to intercept emails may have much more technology to hide any traceable information as to where the money went. This is thus a big problem to the company