Enemy of the State and Ben Franklin – View on Privacy
Course: ICS 3U1
Date: Monday November 5, 2012
Privacy is a core human right, which allows the human to preserve his/her dignity, independence, and freedom, therefore, is an essential liberty (Privacilla). Benjamin Franklin said in 1759; “They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”, and is correct to have said this. “Enemy of the State” demonstrates the validity of the statement by making three different examples of what can happen if one gives up even a small amount of liberty. The movie demonstrates how giving up liberty in exchange of temporary security can affect the life of an innocent man, how it can lead to corruption, and how it can even backfire on the conformists of this bill. In the long run, there are no winners when it comes to the public giving up their privacy and trust someone to not misuse the power.
In “Enemy of the State”, invasion of privacy ruined the lives of innocent people. One of the people affected by this invasion was Rachel Banks. Ms. Banks is murdered by the National Security Agency (NSA) to try and frame Robert Dean, even though both are innocent. Another innocent person who has his life destroyed was Daniel Zavitz, a wildlife researcher (IMDb). Mr. Zavitz also loses his life all because one of his hidden cameras, which was designed to monitor geese, recorded a murder done by the NSA. The third innocent person who has their life turned into chaos is Robert Dean. Although Robert Dean doesn’t lose his life like the other two, he still goes through a lot because he has the videotape with the murder, and he doesn’t even know that he does. All three people go through a lot because each is somehow connected to a murder, and the murderers are invading their privacy to try to prevent the public from finding out about the murder.
Giving already-powerful people...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document