Right 2 Privacy

1
Right 2 Privacy

• Chapter 2
• ATL 135 SEC 003
• Bekha Boyce
• Molly OBrien
• Rachael Poirier
• Jeff Veach
• Lauren Vendittelli (MOE)

2
A Loss of Privacy Benefits Society/More Laws are
not Needed to Protect Privacy

• Finger printing those who receive any form of
  welfare, social security, or unemployment checks
  avoids people receiving numerous checks.
• By keeping computerized data on patients provides
  important information to doctors, provides
  organization, and security of everyone's files.
• Parents have the right to know what their nannies
  are doing while they are watching the kids.----
  the majority of parents will fire their nannies
  afterwards.
• If more laws are formed about the paparazzi then
  the public will only hear what the government
  will allow us to hear.
• The rich and powerful people in our country take
  advantage their fame and win million dollar law
  suits as a result of the many privacy rights.
• public ---gt tabloids ---gt paparazzi ---gt
  celebrities.

3
A Loss Of Privacy Harms Society / More Laws Are
Needed to Protect Privacy

• Invasions of privacy can be treated as trespass,
  assault, or eavesdropping.
• Most invasions involve technology, wiretaps,
  video cameras, computer, etc.
• Four kinds of Privacy Rights are
• Unreasonable intrusion through telephone tapping,
  videotaping, or through binoculars of a persons
  home without a person's consent.
• Use of a persons name without the person's
  consent
• Publication of facts, photographs, or personal
  relations.
• Publication that places a person in a false
  light.
• Now that privacy cannot easily be created by
  simple physical space, it is all the more
  important to insure the existence of private
  enclaves.. through new law.
• The government has all information form everyone
  in America and can use your information at
  anytime, without consent.
• States can require individuals to supply
  information for one purpose and then use that
  information for another purpose.
• The United States Congress will eventually pass a
  privacy law to limit the uses of medical
  information.

4
Random Drug Tests on Student Athletes Do Not
Violate the Right to Privacy

• Amendment XIV
• Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the
  United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
  thereof, are citizens of the United States and of
  the State wherein they reside. No State shall
  make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
  privileges or immunities of citizens of the
  United States nor shall any State deprive any
  person of life, liberty, or property, without due
  process of law nor deny to any person within its
  jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.  
  

• Amendment IV
• 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 or things to be seized.
  

5
Random Drug Tests on Student Athletes Do Not
Violate the Right to Privacy

• Athletes feel that, according to the first and
  fourth amendments, drug tests are invading their
  right to privacy, however, they are wrong.
• In order to protect and gain control over a
  student body, a district must be able to override
  certain government laws and make their own.
• Many athletes argue that a drug test is also an
  unreasonable search and seizure, however, that's
  untrue because it's been proven that drug use in
  school has caused students to become increasingly
  rude in class and that drug tests are helping to
  gain control over them
• "Students who voluntarily participate in school
  athletics have reason to expect intrusions upon
  normal rights and privileges, including privacy."
  ( Antonin Scalia et al 89).

6
Random Drug Tests on Student Athletes Violate the
Right to Privacy (cont.)

• On August 26 1997 New Jersey Superior Court
  Assignment Judge Sybil Moses temporarily blocked
  Ridgefield Park Board of Education from giving
  random drug tests to student athletes.
• On August 28 1999 in Oklahoma City a lawsuit was
  filed against the Tecumseh Board of Education
  fighting a school policy that made students take
  drug and alcohol tests in order to take certain
  academic classes.
• A similar case was filed in 1996 in Rushville,
  Indiana where a drug testing policy was
  instituted and students were required to take
  tests in order to participate in extra-curricular
  activities.
• Drug testing can cost anywhere from 20-40 dollars
  for low-cost solutions that are generally not
  very sensitive and subject to error up to 200
  dollars for more comprehensive tests.
• The fourth amendment protects against
  unreasonable search and seizure.

7
Wiretaps Violate the Right to Privacy / Wiretaps
are Necessary to Fight Crime

• The FBI is trying to push laws through Congress
  that would make it easier for them to retrieve
  information about innocent Americans.
• Many civil libertarians are arguing that if the
  Federal Government and FBI receive these
  privileges to further their overall information
  about American citizens that the information
  could end up in the wrong hands.
• The FBI is concurred  that with the new
  technology that is being invented.
• The FBI fear that they will lose their grasp on
  American society.

8
Works Cited

• Etzioni, Amitai. "A Loss of Privacy Benefits
  Society." Civil Liberties Opposing Viewpoints
  (1999) 73- 76.
• Greene Jr., Euguene D. Big Brother
  Surveillance/Division of E.D.G. Enterprises.
  lthttp//www.bigbrothersurveillance.net/mission.htm
  gt.
• Kirtley, Jane E. "More Laws Are Not Needed To
  Protect Privacy." Civil Liberities Opposing
  Viewpoints (1999)81-84.
• NannyVideo.com.  lthttp//www.nannyvideo.comgt/
• Plumbo, Peg. "How can I check physician safety
  records?" iVillage/ParentsPlace.com. 3 November
  2000 lthttp//www.parentsplace.com/fertility/concep
  tion/qa/0,3105,14065,00.htmlgt.
• "The Good and The Bad". Personal Privacy and
  Access to Medical Databases, Lawrence Berkeley
  National Laboratory's ELSI Project site.
  lthttp//www.lbl.gov/Education/ELSI/privacy_pros_co
  ns.htmlgt.

9
Works Cited

• Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
  Privacy Council. lthttp//www.privacycouncil.comgt
• Health Data Security Forum. 11/8/2000.
  lthttp//www.rightoprivacy.com/forums/health.htmlgt
  
• How Privacy Is My Medical Information. 11/8/2000.
  lthttp//www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs8-med.htmgt
• PrivacyAbusesHow, Why, Where. FOCUS Spring
  2000. lthttp//www.abanet.org/publiced/focus/priv_a
  buses.htmlgt
• Privacy Threat in Welfare Reform Bill.
  Independence Institute.11/10/2000
  lthttp//www.i2i.org/SuptDocs/OpEdArc/op950801.htmgt
  
• Two Models to Protect Privacy and the DPPA.
  11/8/2000. lthttp//www.networkusa.org/fingerprint/
  page1b/fp-dppa-two-models.htmlgt

10
Works Cited

• Behrens, Lawrence.  Making the Case An Argument
  Reader. New Jersey Prentice Hall, 2001.
• Scalia, Antonin. "Random Drug Tests on Student
  Athletes Do Not Violate the Right to Privacy."
  Civil Liberties Opposing Viewpoints (1999)
  89-97.
• Aversa, Jeannine. "An Invasion of Privacy, Or
  Critical Law Enforcement Locating Cellular Calls"
  Associated Press. 12 November 2000
  lthttp//abcnews.go.com/sections/us/dailynews/cellu
  lar981022.htmlgt.
• Delaney, Donald P.  et al. "WIRETAP LAWS AND
  PROCEDURES WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT
  TAPS A  LINE". CPSR Computer Professionals for
  Social Responsibility.  7 November 2000
  lthttp//www.cpsr.org/cpsr/privacy/wiretap/wiretap.
  procedure.htmlgt.
• "The FBI's Wish List".Wired Digital Inc., a Lycos
  Network site. 7 November 2000   
  lthttp//www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,15350,0
  0.htmlgt.