What is a logical analysis of the following argument on the use of surveillance technology?
How would you write an argument against the use of surveillance technology?
"We live in a time when surveillance technology is to advanced that we can easily be spotted in public places by video cameras, or tracked by GPS devices, or identified by software with face recognition.
In fact, the former head of public policy at Google, Andrew McLaughlin, said at a Stanford conference in 2007 that he expected public and private agencies to request Google to post live, online surveillance fields worldwide within a decade.
Alarmed at the increasing scope of public surveillance, privacy rights advocates argue that this invasion of our privacy violates the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure.
But their opponents claim that we have no reason to expect privacy when we are in public places; rather we should welcome surveillance technologies, because they prevent and discourage crime as well as provide evidence for criminal investigations."
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.
A Short Argument Against Surveillance
The increasing presence of surveillance technologies in public spaces threatens the privacy rights of all citizens. When we opt for perceived safety over privacy, we end up losing privacy for an ersatz version of safety that is easily abused and seldom safe. Public video cameras are a ubiquitous presence in elevators, department stores, subway platforms, schools, hallways, and even attached to traffic signals. Surveillance can be both voluntary and non-voluntary....
This is only a preview of the solution. Please use the purchase button to see the entire solution