Reading Response 4

Each of the argumentative essays we read for this reading response serves to create an argument and then use evidence to strengthen and prove their views. They each had different arguments and included different kinds of research to strengthen their essays.
In the essay “Is Privacy Overrated? The Merits, Drawbacks, and Inevitability of the Surveillance Nation”, Katherine Mangu-Ward argues that there in no privacy in America, especially in cities and that sooner or later, you wont be able to go anywhere without being tracked. She says that it is hard to find a balance between surveillance that helps society and prevents crime and to protect the citizens Fourth Amendment rights. She uses secondary research to help support her claim by discussing scenarios in which the government can easily track citizens through cameras in the city and through peoples everyday habits that may include using a credit card or taking the fast lane on a toll road. The author also adds a primary statement when she mentions that it doesn’t bother her that certain companies know minor, more less important details of her personal information. Mangu-Ward also uses facts for her evidence when she mentions how cameras have captured crimes and thus helped the courts know what really happened. She balances her evidence showing how cameras and records can help society, but can also violate people right to privacy.
In an excerpt from “Reclaiming ‘Abandoned’ DNA: The Fourth Amendment and Genetic Privacy”, Elizabeth E. Joh states that in a growing number of instances, the police, unburdened by criminal procedure rules, seek this “abandoned DNA” from criminal suspects in hopes of resolving otherwise unsolvable cases (Joh 1). Like Mangu-Ward, Joh also uses secondary research by finding scenarios in which the police have perhaps gone overboard in acquiring evidence from possible criminals. She includes facts for her evidence, showing that there are some instances when police have wrongly gotten evidence, but that proved a criminal guilty. So, her question asks whether is a violation of the fourth amendment to acquire evidence for criminal cases through DNA without consent of the suspected criminal.
The excerpt “The Case for National DNA Identification Cards”, Ben Quarmby argues that fear of renewed attacks and a desire for greater national security have now prompted many to call for improvements in the national personal identification system (Quarmby 1). However, he points out that there is a line in which identification becomes too personal and starts violating people’s rights. He uses secondary research and finds information about the countries current identification system and how it could be improved, but how it may violate fourth amendment rights. Quarmby uses facts as evidence when he says that a more detailed identification card containing information about your DNA may be met with strong opposition. He states that there is hope for a possibility of better identification cards for people so that our country can be safe and still honor citizen’s rights.
In the sample essay “Putting a Price on Nature”; Drenner supports conserving the environment and preserving the untouched land we have left and not ruining it by drilling for oil. He uses secondary research by researching facts about todays oil and drilling situations and includes evidence that supports his argument. Drenner states that the devastating effects of drilling would most certainly be present even if the methods used are environmentally safe (Drenner 2) and that there is not enough land allotted by the government to even begin to extract oil (Drenner 3). He ends his essay stating that we need to find other ways to solve our oil problems.
The kinds of research that the authors provide does influence me; if it is an essay solely based on their first hand experiences, I am less likely to completely believe what they have to say just because an essay like that can easily become bias. If the author shows statistics and facts, I am more likely to be able to see their point if the evidence they are giving is true and solid. My prior beliefs and values do affect how I read these essays because I am going to keep true to what I believe in and read with my bias until an author gives me a reason and evidence to think differently.