Security vs. Privacy, Essay Example

Introduction

The term security is the process of reducing the prevalence of acquired values and assets to possible threats and damages. On the other hand, privacy is the claim by persons on which personal information or details should be made available or communicated to other parties (Zedner 36).  Public institutions, private institutions such as schools, airports and the general public are deeply into looking for security measures following the rising cases of vandalism, terrorism, theft and other acts of that pose a threat to the public security. The question is that, “what is urgent between security of the public and privacy standings?” This follows numerous security measures being put in place, which to some extend, invade the privacy of individuals. One of these measures includes hidden cameras that are being installed by these institutions for security purposes. For instance, according to the details of the statistics released by the US security department, almost 85% of public and private institutions reports one or several serious incidents of violence, terrorism, theft and other security related crimes. Over two million crimes are reported in the United States in a span of one year. This is how critical and practical the issue of security is to the public (Zedner 49). Therefore, my position is that national security should be given an upper hand as compared to individual privacy.

Security is the main/prime value of all other values

Security has proven to be the sole sense of physical survival and a major requirement by individuals to enjoy other values; inclusive of privacy. Most States serve the purpose of ensuring that people and their property are physically secure. In this aspect, the security of people and property is valued more than other values such as privacy, liberty and political autonomy just to name a few. According to the social contract and communitarian perspective, individuals are likely to surrender any measure pertaining to their freedom and instead get security and protection. By submitting to political authority, people expect maximum security and protection as the main obligation and reason for submission. The State first sets out a basic level of security and allocates appropriate resources before considering other societal values in order of importance to the society. Security appears to be among the most vital survival values while privacy is clearly a non-survival value. It is thus hard to trade a survival value with a non survival value. It will make sense to compromise security with other survival values but not with non-survival requirement such privacy or liberty. Therefore, it is quite clear that survival is far much important than protection of rights and freedoms which we view as necessary for a good life. This is because these freedoms and fundamental rights can only be enjoyed under secure environment (Chandler 125).

Security is not an inherently limited value; privacy is

The fact that security is not an inherently limited value as compared to privacy makes it a much more compelling value in the hierarchy of human needs. It is natural that people feel to have more security compared with the way they feel to have privacy. Considering privacy, human beings tend to avoid the extremes and instead go for intermediate security. In other words, people tend to avoid being too exposed or being too alone in various matters and instead opt for an optimum level of privacy. For security, the perception is quite different since most human being tends to opt for the maximum possible security available. Therefore, as much as privacy is a good thing, it is more certain that security must come first and that people will always lean towards security as compared to individual privacy (Chandler 126).

Distributive implications of counterterrorism

Security has proven to be more important than privacy especially in case of counterterrorism where by we have seen security being bought or forcefully imposed at the expense of the minority group. It is clearly seen that privacy is traded for security where by counterterrorism measures are forcefully imposed to purchase the security of the majority at the expense of the minority. For instance, Muslims and occupants of Arabic countries face discrimination and are normally the first suspects in cases of terrorism compared to other ethic groups. This is the cost that the minority group (Muslims) incur just for the sake of other peoples security. Some of these acts of terrorism have been witnessed in airports and other public travel systems. For instance, in counterterrorism measures to the rising levels of terrorism in airports, most airports have implemented strict screening measures and have installed cameras to monitor and trace the movement of individuals while in the airport (Schultz 67). This has been a measure to save the majority and screen out the minorities who have continued to offer resistance towards surveillance and screening as an invasion to privacy.  This shows how critical and important security is compared to issues of privacy and other values.

The perception of human beings pertaining risk

Risks are the core threat to the survival of people and property. The natural perception of human beings is that they are more sensitive to risks that may cause harm to their survival or their property as compared to the natural perception possessed on fundamental freedoms and rights such as privacy. In this aspect, it is considered that most human beings will choose security over privacy because security happens to be the core measure towards enhancing survival of both people and property. Therefore, it is clearly seen that security outweighs privacy when it comes to the hierarchy of needs, although both of them are among the values of human beings (Chandler 127).

Summary of the position of the opposes to this argument

Those opposing the above arguments state that security can still be enhanced without much violation of privacy. For instance, they claim that security can be enhanced in airports without groping old passengers or making nude images of children as it is happening now. According them, the management has failed to properly introduce these new procedures to the public thus making passengers to abruptly thrust into these new procedures which in turn cause them trauma, humiliation and bad memories such as rape flashbacks. They also claim that the scanners used for security purposes especially those for genital probing are neither safe nor discrete. However, they finally agree with the fact that national security carries more weight than privacy; although they still insists that the security agents should enhance public awareness of new security measures and procedures implemented to get the public warned of dangers associated, and avoid unnecessary trauma and public humiliation (Chandler 129).

Conclusion

Matters of national security carry more weight compared to individual privacy following the fact that security is the prime value of all other values and that it is not an inherently limited value as privacy. The perception of human beings pertaining risk and the distributive implications of counterterrorism are other arguments that makes national security superior to individual privacy. Although the opposition claims that public awareness should be considered before imposing security measures to avoid trauma and humiliation, they finally agree with the fact that national security is more important than individual privacy.

Works cited

Chandler, Jennifer. Privacy versus national security: Clarifying the Trade-off. Retrieved November 4, 2011 from http://www.idtrail.org/files/ID%20Trail%20Book/9780195372472_kerr_07.pdf

Schultz, Connie. “New Airport Policy: Grin and Bare It.” Retrieved November 7, 2011 from http://www.creators.com/liberal/connie-schultz/new-airport-policy-grin-and-bare-it.html

Zedner, Lucia. The Pursuit of Security: Crime Risk and Security. London: Routledge. 2006. Print.