@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
I en digital tidsalder fylt med trusler, bør personvern fortsatt betraktes som en umistelig rettighet?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Hvordan påvirker muligheten for å få ditt digitale fotavtrykk overvåket din følelse av frihet og tillit til myndighetene?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Ville du akseptert mer statlig overvåking hvis det reduserer terrorhandlinger betydelig?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Hvis sikkerheten din sto på spill, ville du være villig til å gi opp litt privatliv, og hvor trekker du grensen?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Gjør tanken på å bli sett på eller lyttet til av noen du ikke kjenner deg ukomfortabel, og hvorfor?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Se for deg livet ditt som en åpen bok; hvordan ville det endre måten du kommuniserer på nettet?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Hva ville du gjort hvis du fant ut at dine personlige meldinger ble overvåket for å forhindre potensielle forbrytelser?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Når, om noen gang, mener du at fordelene med overvåking oppveier retten til privatliv?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Hvordan ville du følt om dine personlige samtaler ble lyttet til uten ditt samtykke for nasjonal sikkerhet?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Har du noen gang følt at personvernet ditt ble kompromittert, og i så fall, hva bør grensene for den invasjonen være?
@3BGPRHR3 år3Y
Yes, but only under the scrutiny of the courts where necessary to protect citizens either collectively or individually
@3BGP2KN3 år3Y
No, not at all. I think phone calls and emails should be private. It is not other peoples business and they don't need to know what we are talking about.
@3BGMGP73 år3Y
Only in severe circumstances where national security is threatened.
@3BGLWPV3 år3Y
They should only be able to monitor people who have been identified as a threat, and only by court order
@3BDL75V3 år3Y
I say 'no', but only because I see a growing society that has less and less respect for the 'Honour system' and I believe that even though this may be an important tool to protect against suspected crimes of terrorism, it will be abused and misused.
@3BD78GZKonservative3 år3Y
if this was an ironclad method to reduce terrorism, then yes. otherwise, this is an invasion of privacy
@3BCM9WC3 år3Y
I feel like the federal government should be allowed to monitor emails and phone calls that are flagged with key words that insinuate a possible terrorist or illegal act.
@3BC5V7K3 år3Y
I find this to be a ridiculous notion. Under certain circumstances it would be permissible but its a blatant intrusion of privacy and completely unnecessary. A acceptable situation is someone suspected for crimes, but just monitoring people for the sake of doing so is completely illogical.
@3BC2FSD3 år3Y
No, and enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications, It is the citizens responsibility to protect the country in this case since the government cannot possibly handle everything and proper education provided on the subject in schools on a side note they are taught in a way that does not create future paranoia. Once a threat is flagged by citizens only then should authority intervene. Immigrants will have to be under surveillance for as long their education into citizenship is provided, and Immigrants with a history of violence or fraud will not be allowed into the country.
@3BBWFYN3 år3Y
I'm torn...I am concerned with the federal government having cart blanche access to private information, yet I am for being able to prevent acts that negatively harm groups of innocent people.
@M553243 år3Y
Yes but only with a court order or a percieved threat
@M3FKP23 år3Y
Yes, after proving that the act is necessary for National security, and combating organized crime and child pornography