The term net-widening is a term that describes all other options that allow criminals to stray away from incarceration or diversion programs to help perpetrators stray away from the court. The primary purpose for net-widening is to decrease the number of criminals going to court. I do think that net-widening is a legitimate concern because there are a few negative effects. Net-widening allows for an increase of control over the majority amount of people. This idea does not reduce the desire of a convicted criminal to re-commit a crime.
The Patriot Act will be one of the most controversial pieces of legislation ever to be passed by the United States’ government. People in our society nowadays give the ultimatum “pro security, or anti-freedom?” That is not the Patriot Acct in a nutshell; it is far from that statement. There are more cons than there are pros, but the pros that have come out of the passage of the Patriot Act may have saved millions of American and international lives from the destruction of terrorist. That being said the lives that were saved did come at a price of the American citizens’ privacy and broke numerous amendments from the Bill of Rights.
Net-neutrality is the principle that providers of Internet services enable access to all contents with no prejudice or discrimination against sites or products regardless of the source. In December, the U.S. government repealed the national regulations that prevented “Internet Service Providers from blocking legal content, throttling traffic or prioritizing content on their broadband networks” in favor of a “looser set of requirements that ISPs disclose any blocking or prioritization of their own content.” In summary, the government has decided to change net-neutrality and make it easier to profit from. The government’s want, and subsequent success, to change the strict guidelines by which net-neutrality operated with is supported by the Chairman
The moment that the Twin Towers fell in New York, America became destined for change. In the wake of these attacks, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 was quickly passed through congress, and signed by then-president, George W. Bush. The act itself gives the FBI and other government agencies the ability to do and use certain methods, many of which are already used by other law enforcement organizations, to help prevent future terrorist attacks. Since then, this piece of legislation has been the center of much debate and controversy. But, there is ample reason to believe that the Patriot Act is needed and effective.
The Act was designed to preserve the safety of America from any other terrorist attacks and to not allow another ambush to happen within the United States. After the aggression which took place on September 11th, 2001, there was a great fear in the American people. The ratification of the Patriot Act was the government’s approach of trying to prevent any forms of terrorism in our country. Another positive that thing that came with the Patriot Act was the recognition of technology and how technology usage is growing at a rapid pace.
On September 11, 2001 terrorists attacked our country. Immediately after these attacks our US congress had to do something. They passed two major pieces of legislature. The first being authorization for use of military force, which gave George W Bush permission to use military force against terrorists, which he used to wage a full war. The second legislature was Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, or the patriot act, which allowed government to use loopholes in the fourth amendment to keep surveillance on their citizens to stop terrorism.
The Patriot Act was created in response of September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the US. The USA Patriot Act was passed by the United States Government and signed by former President George on October 26, 2001. The Act was passed around in many areas in House of Congress and was supported by the both Republican and Democratic parties. (Jenks) In the year of this law being processed there was huge discussions regarding the pros and cons of this bill.
With the world population being 7,259,902,243 people, a grossly huge amount of people use the Internet, the number being 3,366,261,156 people worldwide. That ends up being almost half of the population, the percentage being 46.4% I one hundred percent disagree with the “decision” of the government ridding of the Internet entirely, as if that isn't clear enough already. Though the government might find the termination of the Internet useful in some circumstances, I have no doubt that it may result in riots, violence, protests, and more in order to get it
The Affordable Care Act or “Obamacare” has constituted one of the most important topics since its implementation in 2010. Since 2010, the fate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been uncertain. The ACA was a historic achievement for the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats. But it passed Congress without a single Republican vote, and the GOP subsequently mounted legal and legislative challenges to Obamacare, vowing to repeal and replace it. (Oberlander, 2012, p.2165).
More was Lost than Lives The day of the September 11 attacks was a terrible day that will be forever remembered. The attacks however did not only cost Americans their lives at the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon and on those planes; the attacks also took Americans’ freedoms. Following the attacks the unconstitutional Patriot act was passed, the inconvenient and ineffective Transportation and Security Agency was formed, and the NSA’s mass surveillance program was increased. While all of these actions were done in order to protect Americans from terrorism they have only succeeded in denying Americans the very rights afforded to them in the United States Constitution.
Subsequent, to the September 11th,2001 terrorist attacks, the Department of Justice proposed The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act) to prevent future terroristic attacks. According to Preserving Life and Liberty article, the PATRIOT ACT has played an imperative part in “a number of successful operations to protect innocent Americans from plans of terrorist dedicated to destroying America and our way of life.” Further, Rosemary Jenks emphases in her article “A Summary of the Anti-Terrorism Law’s Immigration – Related Provision” that the PATRIOT Act focuses mainly on “reinforcing the arsenal of tools available to the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and federal prosecutors for identifying and disabling terrorist networks operating both
He, along with many Americans, believed the Communications Decency Act could affect such information and discussions. He proposed a study of the internet by the Justice Department. He wanted the Department to evaluate and search for ways to improve the enforcement of the existing laws, in addition to help parents monitor their children’s internet
In 2001 after the tragedy of 9/11 President George W. Bush passed the PATRIOT Act. The act is supposed to protect Americans from future terrorist attacks, but what it's actually doing is defying most principles this country was founded upon. Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act enables the FBI and the NSA to listen to the phone records of millions of Americans. Not only is the government invading the privacy of millions, but the way it's being done is illegal. The government is invading on the personal lives of people who have never been suspected of being a terrorist.
My Research Paper is about the Obamacare also known as the Affordable Care Act (A.C.A.). Its name comes from our 44th President, Barack Obama. It is a health insurance plan providing affordable health care to millions. It has improved the quality of the health care and health insurance. President Obama signed the A.C.A. into law on March 23, 2010.
The continuing debate about Net Neutrality has arguments from both sides of the political appeal of the idea to preserving Internet growth and innovation, but differ in where they perceive the threat to be (“FCC order ignites the Debate”, Par. 4). Democrats typically approve of the idea of Net Neutrality while Republicans oppose it. People who do support Net Neutrality have latched on to the idea of reclassifying broadband transmission as a way to boost the FCC’s ability to enforce its open Internet rules in the future (The Reclassification Debate, Par. 1). One main discussed topic talked about in the Net Neutrality topic is the warning that fast Internet lanes could give an advantage to companies with deep pockets, which leave small firms
