National Security is more important than privacy.

Privacy rights may be the most important rights that American citizens posses. Justice Louis D. Brandeis, an associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States, once said this: "The makers of the Constitution conferred the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by all civilized men"the right to be let alone" (1). Our founding fathers believed in the necessity of confidentiality and privacy. Privacy shouldn't be something infringed upon by our government. It is one of the things that our military should be used for to protect. When our government was founded, we had a Bill of Rights for a reason. Our founding fathers did not want an invasive government. They wanted one that stuck to its core enlightenment values, and they didn't want it to be like Britain was. We've seen throughout history that governments who restrict freedoms like privacy misuse their power against their people. Wouldn't Joseph Stalin or Adolf Hitler have loved to use surveillance cameras? I think we all know that it would have been better for their citizens to know what they were up to rather than their government removing the privacy of their citizens. People would've been revolted if they more knew what Stalin and Hitler were up to, and lack of government transparency was the cause of it. If someone as corrupt as these two men rose to power in America, they would be able to use measures that do increase National Security to strip us of all the freedom we have left. One important thing that privacy gives us is the ability to rebel against our government. Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence said explicitly this: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it" (2). If our government isn't giving us the liberties we were promised in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, we deserve a new government. If we don't have privacy, we cannot take back these rights because our government has the ability to spy on us. Privacy is important because it's talked about in our Bill of Rights. I would argue that amendments two through four all deal with this. Amendment two: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" (3). Amendment three: "No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law" (4). Amendment four: "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). Amendment two is an explicit protection of privacy because it stops the government from taking our guns. If we wanted a society that is completely safe, the government would place security cameras in everyone's homes, and they would guarantee that no one possessed a weapon of any kind. That would be a bad scenario, as it would be taking into consideration the benefits of National Security before privacy. Humans deserve the private decision to equip themselves with weapons to make them feel safe if they want. The government should punish them if they use them to harm or strip the liberty off someone else, but if that doesn't happen, gun rights should not be infringed upon. Amendment three talks about how the military shouldn't be disruptive towards its people. If we wanted a secure society, military members would be in all of our houses, and no one would ever do anything wrong. That is not freedom, though. We choose to have privacy. Amendment four talks about warrants and how the government cannot take your stuff. Private property is an important value in America. The government cannot take your stuff unless you use your stuff to infringe on someone else's liberty. They must have a warrant to invade your private property. If you want nasty government officials walking into your house, be my guest. My tax dollars will not support such an abomination. Sure, this would increase national security, but it doesn't seem like it would make society more free. Our government is supposed to protect our freedoms, and if they don't, I hope we get taken over by a country that will give it to us. My last point of my relatively short opening argument is about what we are protecting. National Security's main use is the protection of a nation's laws and constitution. If we aren't using our constitution, then why do we have a military protecting us in the first place? Also, why are you so glad to trust the government? Democrats and Republicans both are beginning to put their faith in the government, and it's scary. The IRS, which is supported by Democrats, has targeted conservative Tea Party groups (6). When you give government, an entity which uses force to make us give it money, the power it wants, it will misuse it. Even if they say it's for security, do you really believe politicians? They lie for our votes, and they constantly end up in scandals. We shouldn't trust government as much as we do. I'd rather risk 9/11 happening again once every ten years than give up the privacy that I deserve as an American citizen. There is no right that is more treasured than privacy, and I insist that privacy is an essential part of liberty. Next time, please denote where your sources are being used in your argument. It was a little confusing to read. Also, I was a little confused when you forgot to use an apostrophe at the end of the third paragraph. Other than that, it was a great first round and I'm excited to hear your rebuttals! (1) http://fee.org... (2) http://www.archives.gov... (3) https://www.law.cornell.edu... (4) https://www.law.cornell.edu... (5) https://www.law.cornell.edu... (6) http://www.washingtonpost.com...