26th Annual Bill of Rights
Art and Essay Contest, 2009-2010

TOPIC:  Privacy and free speech on the Internet:
              Should our private information be gathered, used, or sold to the Government?

3rd Prize, Middle School
by T.M. from Pacific Grove Middle School

A Safe Nation

Thomas Jefferson once said, "A strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the highest virtues of a good citizen, but not the highest. The laws of saving out country when it is in danger are of higher obligation. To lose our country by the scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law itself and life, liberty and property, and all those who are enjoying them with us; this absurdly sacrificing the end to the means." Thomas Jefferson is trying to say that people's right to privacy, which is not clearly stated in the United States Constitution, may not be as important as the country's national security and that of people as a whole. If people believe that their own personal right to privacy is more important than what is good for all people collectively, there would be no point in the law and it would be lost. The government should be able to access people's private information that they voluntarily put on the Internet through Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and advertising companies because it may keep our country safe from terrorist attacks, because collecting private information is not illegal if you sign an ISP's Terms and Agreements for the release of your information, and because the right to privacy is implied, but not expressly stated in the United States Constitution.

On November 5, 2009, a horrible incident occurred at Fort Hood in Texas. Thirteen people died and forty-one were injured after an armed gunman, later revealed to have been linked to a radical Yemeni cleric, opened fire. "In addition to the e-mails to the imam in Yemen, I have confirmed through independent sources that there were communications and wire transfers mad to Pakistan," U.S. Senator Michael McCaul said in a statement. "This Pakistan connection just raises more flags about this case and demonstrates why it's important for Congress to exercise it oversight authority." This is just one reason why the government should be able to obtain people's private information from ISPs: it might prevent a terrorist attack, which everyone would benefit from, whereas if people care more about personal privacy, only some of the population would be protected. Some people may argue that statistics show that using the Internet to find evidence is not proven effective. However, a case in Canada involved a man who stole a car and parked it in his driveway. Information such as his name, home address, and other personally identifying information were gathered through Facebook and Google Images. The police were then able to find the suspect's house and arrest him. Although Internet evidence may not always prove effective, it should still be legal to gather information from ISPs and advertising companies.

When a person signs up for a website such as Facebook or Twitter, he must sign the "terms and agreements" before actually creating a profile. In their "terms and agreements" websites usually state Privacy Policies, Safety Policies, Registration, and Account Security, as well as other policies. The Privacy Policy of Facebook explains what information it collects, such as a person's IP address, browser, and also his "cookies," which are pieces of data stored on the user's computer tied to information about the user. After signing Facebook's "terms and agreements" the user has just consented to Facebook's collecting all of the things listed above. Most people think that it is unfair that Facebook takes their private information, but if they sign the "terms and agreements" it is perfectly legal. "We may provide information to service providers to help us bring you the service we offer. In connection with these offerings and business operations, our service providers may have access to your personal information for use for a limited time in connection with these business activities." That quote was taken directly from the "Sharing Your Information with Third Parties" in the Privacy Section of Facebook's Terms and Agreements. By signing the "terms and agreements," a user permits Facebook to give his information to advertising companies or Internet providers who may then sell a user's information to anyone, including the government.

The United States Constitution has no express provision regarding a right to privacy. The Fourth Amendment holds, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons of things to be seized." As the Constitution does not expressly protect people's private information that they have voluntarily placed on the Internet, people must next look to specific laws to determine the legality of government searches and seizures of such information. As the ACLU reports that there are no laws prohibiting government access to private data posted to the Internet, then such conduct is legal until it is rules illegal and/or unconstitutional.

When Thomas Jefferson said that a strict observance of the law is important, he also said that keeping our country safe from danger is of higher obligation. To lose our country merely because people want privacy on the Internet is absurd. When something is posted on the Internet, it is accessible to the whole world, so why not to the government also? In conclusion, the government should be able to obtain people's private information that they freely submit on the Internet because it may very well keep our great nation safe.