ARRR!!

It is true, the parrot is gone, and the old pistol has been replaced with an RPG, but the pirate is still here. One of the 'simple' solutions to the problem of piracy is just to have the men of the cargo ships carry guns, but a classmate of mine, writing in the blog 'Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness' has a different point of view. She suggests that the "solution to the problem lies in reform on land, not guns at sea."

This seems makes sense. If we could control the land, where the pirates come from, we could control their effect at sea. But how would we control a foreign land? Easily, we could use our bloated military budget just land a battleship at every major port and take over operations. But if I try to use a bit of foresight, I may not see this being a great solution. Fortunately my classmate can see this too and also suggests America should not "pull a Panama-esque revolution in the African country to put a more pro-America/freedom of seas regime in power." Although if I were running for power in Africa I would be running under the freedom of seas slogan.

The suggested solution is to have reform come from within their own borders (maybe with a smidgen of U.N. help). Why doesn't Somalia think of this? I just got an email from an African prince, wanting some help in transferring funds to the U.S.; maybe I should suggest that solution to him. In truth, that would be an idea solution, however it will not happen in the near future. In the mean time we need to make our seas safe.

Perhaps if we were to punish the pirates we catch it would be a deterrent to other pirates. My classmate suggests having "these men need to be either tried and prosecuted in American courts (for their crimes are against Americans), or even better in International Court." Again, taking action against the pirates seems like a good idea on the surface, but lets look at what is really happening. These men are not working for themselves, and the people actually benefiting from piracy will not get caught by the navy. It would be a pretty small warlord if he had to do his own piracy. Once it was known what happened to the most recent group of pirates, a retaliation attack was mounted by the warlord and even more boats were taken! So again, how are we supposed to protect ourselves?

Guns.

Wiretapping

While preaching protection from the government during his campaign, President Obama's administration has now made claims which reaffirm the old administration's policy on wiretapping. In the case Jewl vs. NSA, the Obama Administration's made two arguments. First, they argued that the state secrets privilege requires the court to dismiss the issue out of hand, that continuing the case would result in some breach of security. Second, the DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying, basically saying that unless the U.S. Government freely discloses information about you to the public, there is nothing you can do about it.

There has been some controversy about this apparent change in view, but I see nothing wrong with this. Who cares if the government gets a few phone records and investigates you? I may not necessarily think that this is the best use of tax dollars but I think it's a perfectly good use of technology.

It would be a pretty boring post if I were to bring up an issue and say I see nothing wrong with it, so I will try to defend this issue. For me to properly defend this issue though, I would need to know why people think it's bad. I would like some response to this, but in lieu of this I will try to think of reason why wiretapping may be seen as bad.

1. Bad use of tax dollars
2. Illegal
3. Violation of privacy
4. People may be afraid that the government will find illegal activities in their own life

For the first issue, it may be true, but I don't know any stats on the effectiveness of of wiretapping, so I can't say for certain.

For the second issue, these people are suing the government, the people who decide what is illegal and what is legal. That, and the government has made great strides on making it legal.

For the third issue, there may be a concern that the government will overstep its bounds in this situation, which would lead to a progression of a lack of privacy. This is perhaps a legitimate concern, but it is very hard to hypothesize on this scenario because it's hard to say whether people will acclimate to the lack of privacy and continue acclimating to further violations of privacy, or whether there is a point where people will not stand for such inquiries into their personal life. Will the government stop at wiretapping, or will it get to the point that the government will be able to pull your car over, have you step you, put a bag over your head and search our car without any reason or warrant. The issue there isn't that the government would plant evidence and falsely accuse you, but no citizen would want to be treated like that, and if wiretapping if found to be legal, it reaffirms the notion that the government is in control, not the citizens. That being said, there is also clearly a need to protect national security, so we must ask ourselves what we are willing to give up in order to live safely. If you are not willing to give up anything, I wish you luck when (not if) some less than scrupulous person decides to take advantage of you. Personally, I am willing to let the government listen to my calls.

For the fourth issue, if you are doing something illegal, you should be prosecuted.