Category: Civil rights

Government Surveillance: Violation Of Civil Rights

Many citizens claim that the government is violating their civil rights by using their personal data for legitimate purposes. What is more important? Is it the fact that they should have the privacy for texting their mates? Or is it the fact that the government is protecting their lives from potential danger? Government surveillance is essential to public safety and terrorism prevention. The government’s collection of data is not a violation of civil rights because it deters criminals from harming the public and it causes no harm for an individual.

The government’s collection of data is not a violation of civil rights because it ensures public safety. The government uses advanced programs that pick up dangerous keywords to prevent terrorist attacks. As it states in “Strong Oversight of Intelligence Gathering Protects Civil Rights”, by Joel “the telephone metadata program conducted under the “business records” provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA] … officially titled the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001]), and the collection of communications from foreign intelligence targets who are non-U.S. persons located outside the United States.” This proves the government has reasonable purposes to access phones’ data to prevent terrorist plots. In addition, it states, “Under the phone metadata program, the government obtains and reviews phone records only to identify whether telephones associated with a foreign terrorist organization are in communication with a telephone inside the United States (directly or indirectly).” which clarifies why in some cases the government will access a citizen’s information. The government’s access to personal data is not a violation of civil rights because it causes no harm to an individual. Citizens usually become outraged at the government without understanding the concepts of the legislation. Furthermore, by using social media they actually allow the companies to access their personal data. As it states in “Strong Oversight of Intelligence Gathering Protects Civil Rights”, by Joel “Under the Section 702 program, the government can only obtain foreign intelligence

Many citizens claim that the government is violating their civil rights by using their personal data for legitimate purposes. What is more important? Is it the fact that they should have the privacy for texting their mates? Or is it the fact that the government is protecting their lives from potential danger? Government surveillance is essential to public safety and terrorism prevention. The government’s collection of data is not a violation of civil rights because it deters criminals from harming the public and it causes no harm for an individual.

The government’s collection of data is not a violation of civil rights because it ensures public safety. The government uses advanced programs that pick up dangerous keywords to prevent terrorist attacks. As it states in “Strong Oversight of Intelligence Gathering Protects Civil Rights”, by Joel “the telephone metadata program conducted under the “business records” provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA] … officially titled the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001]), and the collection of communications from foreign intelligence targets who are non-U.S. persons located outside the United States.” This proves the government has reasonable purposes to access phones’ data to prevent terrorist plots. In addition, it states, “Under the phone metadata program, the government obtains and reviews phone records only to identify whether telephones associated with a foreign terrorist organization are in communication with a telephone inside the United States (directly or indirectly).” which clarifies why in some cases the government will access a citizen’s information.

The government’s access to personal data is not a violation of civil rights because it causes no harm to an individual. Citizens usually become outraged at the government without understanding the concepts of the legislation. Furthermore, by using social media they actually allow the companies to access their personal data. As it states in “Strong Oversight of Intelligence Gathering Protects Civil Rights”, by Joel “Under the Section 702 program, the government can only obtain foreign intelligence information as defined by law…. This authority cannot be used to intentionally target United States persons or anyone inside the United States.” Surveillance used unbiased is one of the best ways to deter terrorist plots. In addition, it states. “Under the Section 702 program, the government can only obtain foreign intelligence information as defined by law. This authority cannot be used to intentionally target United States persons or anyone inside the United States.” this proves that citizens’ rights are protected and no unlawful judgment will be held against them.

The government has conducted domestic surveillance to protect its nation and its citizens while keeping legislation in mind. If an individual has nothing to hide then there is no reason to be too skeptical about the government’s work. People should understand that their government officials are working for their benefit and not to harm their own citizens.

Essay on Police Brutality and Civil Rights Movement

Many have found that a loss of trust by members of the community is the result of police brutality — trust officials need to be effective. Crime victims and witnesses will be much less likely, when the cops have betrayed the faith of their neighbors, their family members, and their friends, to report or collaborate on the investigation. Police officers have a lot of freedom in carrying out their tasks. They can legally use physical force, and even deadly force under certain circumstances, as they are expected to protect the public and deal with potentially violent people. However, if the officer uses force or uses more force than is necessary for the performance of his or her job, he or she can cross the line into police brutality. Citizens also petition for disproportionate police forces in such cases. Although police brutality is usually applied to cause physical harm to a person, the use of bullying tactics beyond the reach of the officially approved police procedure may also cause psychological damage. For example, during the Civil Rights Movement, the people who committed police brutality may previously have acted with the implicit approval of the local legal system. Individuals engaging in police brutality in the modern age may do this with their subordinate’s tacit approval or maybe rogue cops. They may, in any case, carry out their actions by the law and, most often, cover up their illegal activity.

Police corruption and police brutality take many forms and are induced by many different factors. One of the reasons is the police subculture that can negatively impact the process. Sometimes, new agents seek to adhere to police behavior action patterns, and expectations. These standards require rookies that emulate senior officers and fulfill the commands of the superior or face possible ridicule, criticism, or loss of work otherwise. The unwritten rule known as the blue wall or the blue code allows policemen to stand up and prevent them from disclosing police misconduct, like police brutality. The blue wall or blue code.

Several doctrines have been cited as partial explications for the fragmentation of judicial action in pursuit of police malpractice such as federalism, division of powers, cause, deference, discretion, and burden of proof. There is also proof however that judges are unable, or choose, to see systematic trends of police brutality. Additional factors identified as fostering police brutality include institutionalized structures of security education, leadership, and culture; a criminal justice system that discourages authorities from actively prosecuting the police; and a racist political system, that hates criminal activity and respects tougher police forces, that respects all its residents ‘ due process. The prevention of police deviance is considered to be impossible, at best, without any significant social reform. Law enforcement officials have enormous power to strip people of rights, to hunt and live for their property, and to capture and use violence against them. Under specific circumstances, certain measures are legally permitted, and police officers must be qualified to know when these powers can be used legitimately. Because law enforcement officers are among the most influential professions in society they are often in touch with relatively powerless and defenseless civilians who may be unable to prevent the unlawful use of the power by a policeman.

The company confers enormous power over citizens on law enforcement to enable the police to maintain peace and preserve social order. You have a lot of the right to decide what rules to enact, when, and against whom to execute. A wide array of choices and abilities will result in their abuse of power. Some police officers are not merely law enforcement officials, but the law itself. Each perpetrator also tells his wife that he can rob her, if and when he wishes, of his physical safety, confidentiality, independence, and happiness. However, the majority of the abusers cannot enlist assistance to carry out their threats under the criminal justice system. Law enforcement batterers were. Officers say to the complainant, ‘Call the police, who will they believe?’ An agent is in considerable organized resistance. If a victim decides to file a criminal complaint, the police and the public attorney will have to submit a very compelling story to resist their reluctance to proceed with the complaint. We will have to be able to show that the perpetrator used his status and power to dominate and terrorize her, in addition to specific forms of abuse. Counsel for the perpetrators must be conscious not only of the broader domestic violence issues but also of the police tactics associated with domestic violence and the workings of the criminal justice system. Operating with the victims of domestic violence concerning the policeman has made it clear to us that traditional solutions are often ineffective and can also make the victim more insecure. The approaches need to be rethought on many points. Given the complexity of this problem, we and other service partners need to be trained before we can expect to represent this unique demographic properly.

Power and authority are tools to be used responsibly and ethically by law enforcement officials. Officers, agencies, and societies will be using this authority in a misused way without an ethical life. Several measures to curb police brutality have been suggested. Body-mounted devices are a possible alternative. The theory that police officers use cameras is that when they understand that they are recording their actions, they will be less likely to commit malpractice. The US Department of Justice under Obama’s administration has provided body cameras in the police departments with $20 million. During a case study to test body camera effects on police actions, researchers found evidence that police employed less force when they had body cameras with civilians.

Work-Cited

1. England, Deborah C. “Police Brutality.” Www.nolo.com, Nolo, 3 Dec. 2013,
2. “Police Brutality in the United States.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 19 Nov. 2019,
3. “The Misuse of Police Powers.” Misuse of Police Powers: Police Officer Involved Domestic Violence | Abuse of Power | Diane Wetendorf Inc,

The Customer Is Always Right’ Principle in the Field of Customer Service: Critical Essay

The customer is always right. This old adage may seem like an exaggeration, but it’s actually a pretty accurate way to think about your rights as a customer. Most companies are required to serve all their customers, even if they aren’t happy with the service they receive. This is called a ‘harsh’ or ‘rigid’ policy, and it’s the opposite of the ‘friendly’ or ‘flexible’ approach.

Customers have many legal rights, but some are more important than others. The most important legal right a customer has is the right to a product that is of acceptable quality. This means that a business must deliver the goods or services it promised at the time it was contracted to do so. If a customer is not 100% satisfied with the quality of the product or service, the customer is entitled to a remedy.

There are several important legal rights that a customer has when it comes to buying any products. They include the right to buy a product they want at a fair price or not to buy a product, the right to return a product within a certain timeframe with minimal fuss, and the right to a refund or replacement if a product is defective.

The customer is always right is a legal principle that ensures customers are treated fairly and are not cheated out of a service they’ve paid for. It also helps ensure that companies are held accountable for their actions. Because of this, everyone is entitled to a specific level of service, which is usually specified in a contract or policy. This is called ‘customer expectations’.

In a customer who is unhappy with the service they receive from a company can claim that the company is in breach of the law. This means that they can make a ‘small claim’ against the company and ask for something such as a refund, a replacement, or another repair. The customer isn’t required to go through the formal legal process of suing the company – he can make a claim and the company has to comply with it. This is called ‘defensible’ or ‘just’ business, and it’s the opposite of the ‘unjust’ or ‘unjustifiable’ business.

The customer is always right is a principle that sets the bar for customer service. Consumers should always be able to expect quality service, no matter how much they are paying or how much the company is making. This doesn’t mean that companies have to provide exceptional service at all costs, but they should make an effort to find solutions to problems and provide better service when they can. This principle also holds true when a business is difficult or unreasonable.

Using the film “Selma” (2014 – Dir. Ava DuVemay) for prompts A, B or C, write on

Using the film “Selma” (2014 – Dir. Ava DuVemay) for prompts A, B or C, write on one, and only one, of the following three topics understanding that papers that have no substantive evidence, as judged by the instructor, from “Selma” (2014) and other sources in the writing prompt will receive a score of 0.00:
Explore in what ways the events represented in “Selma” (2014) are similar and/or dissimilar to the protests in 2020 and 2021 in response to the death of George Floyd as represented by the late Rep. John Lewis’ New York Times oped posted below. Citations should come from “Selma” as well as the oped.
Explore how the visual representation of the events leading to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in the film “Selma” (2014) is different than reading about the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in your textbook Govtll. Citations should come from the film as well as the textbook Govt11.
Identify a current social justice issue, and explore and analyze how the tactics used and strategy developed by the nonviolent protests as represented in the film “Selma” (2014) might be useful is seeking positive change. Citations should come from the film as well as the textbook Govt11 and/or mainstream news sources.