Government Surveilance

The debate ends in this round. My opponent just admitted in Round 3 that surveillance is ok. We're done. This admittance when looking at the first question essentially means that she concedes the entire debate, and you can vote Pro just for that. But, if you don't buy that argument, let's go line by line. She says in Round 3, "How does the government control the news? Are you honestly asking me that? The government is controlling how much we know about where the money is going, what they're testing. . why are they so afraid of hackers if they have nothing to hide? The government censors what they don't want us to see, what they don't want us to know. They're taking away our freedom of speech. " Provide me with specific examples please and thank you. Your speculation is noted however. She says in Round 3, "Only recently was the gay community allowed the right to marriage. Control. Women are paid an average of 20 cents less than men for doing the same job. Control. The government controversy of gun rights is a large debate. The signs saying 'no weapons allowed'. Control. Taxes are monitored by the government. They want something done, a wall for example, they will increase the taxes. We have no say. Control. The signs all over public places, banning smoking. Control. " Can you please go point by point and explain why these forms of control are actually detrimental to society. Now I know the answer to gay marraige, but I'm interested in your answers. She says in Round 3, "The big reason for government surveillance is to protect our nation against terrorist attacks. This is saying that our nation is in danger of receiving an attack every day. That our families are constantly in danger. I don't know about you, but I don't see terrorist attacks happening every day in our country. So why would you put up your privacy for our government when we aren't even at risk every day? If the government holds our information, it would only make our country more of a target. Other nations would want our information. Doesn't that only increase our danger? " ACTUALLY, that's the point of terrorism. You don't see them until they strike. Thank you for pointing out the obvious. That why we must use surveillance against people to make sure that they aren't terrorists plotting to go against our country's ideals. She says in Round 3, "There are many other ways to stop crime in our country that aren't looking through the citizen's private information such as increasing officers, gun controls. . there are plenty of moral ways to go about this. " GIVE MY A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE! !! ! Stop jumping around the issue. She says in Round 3, "Privacy is something to be valued, not stolen by governments. " Um. .. why should it be valued, and please finally provide me with a specific example of how the government is stealing it. She says in Round 3, "With social media, people are willing giving away their information. They know the risks. They know what they're doing. They know what they're giving away. With the government, people don't have a choice. Their privacy and information is stolen and put in the hands of our government. People don't have a choice what the government sees. What does that make us as a nation? Our government is stealing our information as we create it. " You do know the government has as much access to our social media as you and I do right? It's called public domain for a reason. lol She says in Round 3, " Now, if we allow the government to watch/listen to our calls, texts, emails, and internet searches, how far will they go? If they're allowed to break an amendment, what's to stop them from putting up camera in our houses? Tracking our locations? Constantly listening to our conversations? People will learn to fear the government. Is that how a nation is supposed to be? Is that what we want to be known by? The government that's taking over it's citizen's lives? I do realize that's a little on the extreme side. If you were to support this cause, you have to think about the future and what it holds. From all of my world history and basic common sense, I know this: People are greedy. Once they have one unreachable thing, they will strive for the next thing, and the next. Where does it end? Where will they stop? " Alright, I get the point. You're speculating because you don't actually have any evidence. That's fine. -- -- -- I rest my case. I've won already because of the concession and the lack of Con evidence.