Terror Laws Essay Paper Sample
Events that led to the 9/11 attack were the wakeup call for the nation because the loopholes in the security systems had been unveiled and used by terrorists to launch the deadliest attack in the history of America. Almost all the security agencies admitted to being part of the problem that led to the attack and the undeniable fact that the autonomy of the security agencies was detrimental to the survival of the nation. One of the most frantic efforts was seen in Congress, where legislators of the lower and upper houses passed numerous laws to increase cohesion. The future of the nation depended on collaboration and not the autonomy of security agencies.
Some of the loopholes that were unveiled were that some ministries could not operate independently, and they were hence funded to adjust their systems to ensure that they collaborated with the security agencies. The fact that the terrorist attack touched the core of every human being meant that all efforts were to be directed towards ensuring a safer community (Whitehead & Aden, 2001). Among the laws passed after the attack touched on preventing terrorist attacks by tracking suspects and arresting them, tracing their associates within the American borders, quick response in case of attacks the preservation of life before, during, and after the attacks. After that time, some laws touching on security were either amended or repealed because they were drastic, and they contradicted some fundamental laws like freedom and liberties of the people. This factor means that the laws were created under pressure because systems had realized their weaknesses.
One of the major laws that were passed after the 9/11 attack was the patriotic act; in full, the act meant Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, which aimed to demotivate people from participating either directly or indirectly in terrorist activities. After the terrorists attack, security agencies realized that the terrorist had links with American citizens that helped them in surveillance and divulged crucial information that led to the attack (Sinnar, 2003). The patriotic act was then passed to coerce American citizens to be patriotic to the nation. There would be no leniency to anyone that either financed terrorists or helped them carry or attacks and evade the security forces. Strengthening and uniting the country was the primary aim, and people were motivated to report any form of suspicious activity to the security agencies. This law was termed unconstitutional because it allowed search warrants to be issued to security agencies without stating the cause of the search. It was later replaced by the freedom act that required security agencies to raise a sharp point on the need for a search warrant.
The transport security act was also another law that was created immediately after the 9/11 attack when the nation realized that the transport system was the main loophole in the system. Aviation was the most exposed form of transport because all the attacks launched on that day were made through the air. Primarily, the laws stipulated that a specialized agency called the transport security administration to be created to ensure that the security in all public systems is enhanced (Papa, 2013). This decree included the financial facilitation to all states to ensure that they had enough security personnel and security gadgets to keep their systems safe. One of the measures was that security cameras be installed in transport systems and the feed to be linked directly to security agencies. Through the act, security agencies could spot suspected criminals and apprehend them before they could launch attacks. Some of the opposition that the law faced was that it contracted the right to privacy, but it was adjusted, and it now serves its purpose. Throughout the course, I have realized that Terrorism could only be curbed if all security and non-security agencies collaborated and shared information willingly.
Papa, P. (2013). US and EU strategies for maritime transport security: A comparative perspective. Transport policy, 28, 75-85.
Sinnar, S. (2003). Patriotic or unconstitutional? The mandatory detention of aliens under the USA Patriot Act. Stanford Law Review, 1419-1456.
Whitehead, J. W., & Aden, S. H. (2001). Forfeiting enduring freedom for homeland security: A constitutional analysis of the USA Patriot Act and the Justice Department’s anti-terrorism initiatives. Am. UL Rev., 51, 1081.