English Literature

Introduction
As stated by Desai (p.6), wiretapping is a form of eavesdropping that is accomplished by getting hold of and overhearing communication through concealed recording devices connected to a transmission line. Wiretapping as a means of electronic surveillance, monitors both telephonic and telegraphic communication. Wiretaps are easily placed. They only require the identification of a suspects phone at the phone company switching station, and then a tap is directed off the line to a listening device. Tapped conversations can also be recorded. Though the Supreme Court in the United States had allowed for wiretapping of criminal suspects, the practice was abolished in 1968 and the procedures to be followed for wiretapping were put in place. Wiretaps could only be carried out under the approval of a court of justice. Law enforcement agencies have been required to obtain a search warrant before they can situate a wiretap on a criminal suspect.

In all developed democratic countries, telephone tapping is officially and strictly controlled in order to safeguard the privacy of individuals. All telephone tappings require for an approval from the court. A court usually approves wiretapping only when the evidence produced proves that all other non-intrusive measures have failed to detect a criminal. The law also requires that the criminal activity being investigated is very serious. Illegal and unauthorized telephone tapping is regarded to be criminal offences in the United States. Cases involving international criminal activities also follow the same rules due to the highly sensitive nature of the international criminal investigation agencies (Clearinghouse, para. 6).

Wiretapping
The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court may authorize federal organizations to conduct wiretaps in certain cases. Various states have different laws regarding telephone tapping. In some states, it is not illegal for a person to record a telephone conversation with another person. Other states clearly define that recording should be done when only one of the parties is aware. In other states, recording is only done when both parties are aware.

With the current cases of insecurity, the government should enact rules that permit the law enforcement agencies and the intelligence community to wiretap telephone conversations made from overseas. Terrorist groups such as the Al-Qaeda are now using very sophisticated technologies to avoid detection by the law enforcement agencies. The peak of this was experienced during the 911 bombing of the twin towers. The use of these sophisticated technologies by terrorists is proving difficult for the intelligence community to obtain information. Wiretapping will allow the intelligence community to detect conversations coming from potential terrorist groups (Charles,  Peter, para. 6).
Wiretapping is good as it allows the law enforcement agencies as well as the government to carry out the obligation of defending the citizens properly.  By means of wiretaps, the government can also protect the privacy rights of its citizens. George Bush clearly stated that the intelligence community will not listen to conversations within America, but will only concentrate on conversations made with Americans from overseas as well as those made by Americans to overseas (Firefox news, para. 6).

If the government were to legalize wiretapping, it could minimize chances and the frequency of cases when it is sued for infringement of individual rights. This would eliminate the possibility of challenging the government legally. The government, if it uses wiretapping, will be able to obtain information concerning crimes involving kidnapping, murder, narcotics peddling and espionage. If individuals can use telephone tapping to detect the uncanny behavior of their family members for example wives, husbands and children, the government also can use wiretapping for the benefit of the whole nation.

Legalizing wiretapping will greatly aid the government in the fight against terrorism and other forms of international and internal crimes. Through wiretapping, the government will be able to obtain information about a crime being planned. Wiretaps are intended for gathering information on groups or individuals who are suspected to be members of international terrorist groups such as the Al Qaeda. In case the government has doubtless information about a person being a member of an international criminal community, it authorizes for wiretaps to be conducted without warrant. Legalizing wiretapping will go into great lengths to prevent such incidents as the 911 from happening. This is because the intelligence community will obtain information before a plan is executed.  The Al Qaeda has time and again pledged that it will attack the United States another time and will continue attacking the Americans inside and outside their soil. Since no one knows the time or the place, communication intelligence will play a very vital role in disclosing any information that might lead to detection of such an action being planned. Monitoring of communication into and out of the United States will help detect such a plan early and thus avert any attack.

Currently, judges rarely deny the law enforcement agencies as well as the government permission to wiretap. There are no incidents where wiretapping have been authorized and used for personal gains they are all used for the benefit of the nation. If the government were to legalize wiretapping, it would state out rules that dictate circumstances when wiretappings are supposed to be conducted. Wiretaps would therefore be conducted reasonably and laws would be passed to allow wiretaps without a warrant.

Concerning the matter of the international intelligence community, the US government will not be breaking any rule since it does not conduct any wire tapping overseas. Wiretapping is allowed for permanent residents of the United States whether aliens or citizens. However, wiretapping is not conducted on everyone all the time it is only conducted when an individual is suspected of planning for a crime or to have committed a crime. Wiretapping should particularly be conducted for foreigners who are seen as potential threats to public security. Wiretapping is also conducted on Americans who are believed to be spies for international criminal groups. It is very beneficial if the intelligence community is aware of the sort of communication going on between a person in America and another overseas. This awareness may be used by the intelligence community and the law enforcement agencies to prevent a future attack. President George Bush during his term in office asserted that the surveillance program is very important for the United States as well as Americans as it would protect them from future attacks from terrorists.

In California, wiretapping laws were very strict and could not be conducted without the consent of all parties involved in the conversation unless they were conducted for criminal cases of very high level. This law was however amended to allow the law enforcement agencies to obtain a wiretap warrant for cases involving assassination, narcotics peddling, bombing, and kidnaps as well as conspiracy to commit any of these crimes. These laws brought the wiretapping regulations of California in line with the federal law. The government should legalize the use of wiretapping to obtain information concerning crimes considering that some states have made dramatic steps in legalizing the practice. In California for example, some wiretaps are not in line with the federal law. Federal agents may place a wiretap after obtaining a warrant from a federal court in that same situation the states officials may be restricted from obtaining a warrant to place a wiretap by the states laws. The government should legalize wiretapping to avoid such discrepancies from occurring.

Many states have also passed laws allowing for wiretapping after the 911 incident and it would not be good for the government to be left behind in implementing such laws. It is a common practice for people to be searched at the airports. This however, angers a lot of people. Were the victims of the 911 incident to resurrect today, they would give anything to ensure that searches are thoroughly conducted before a flight and that all international calls are wiretapped.

The constitution states that the privacy of an individual will not be violated. The same constitution however, states that it is the right of every citizen to live in a country that is free from all forms of violence such as terrorism, assassination, and kidnaps. In the process of ensuring security of its citizens, the government has the right to utilize any mechanism that will help it acquire the much needed information. It is better to violate the rights of a person to privacy in communication than let that person live under fear from threats by criminals.

If conversations between citizens and foreigners have no issues for one to worry about, then the government can comfortably carry out the wiretaps. Innocent citizens have nothing to hide in their conversations. It is better to sacrifice the privacy of communication for the security of the whole nation than to hold on to it and expose the whole population into terrorism. The intelligence community on the other hand is not interested on calls that pose no security threat to the nation. Love messages between two people for example have nothing to do with matters of security.
The intelligence community therefore will not dwell much on such messages. Very many people argue that they cannot allow others to hear their conversation. However, if one happens to walk in the streets, heshe will hear the same people chatting loudly such that everybody can hear them.  What makes telephone conversations so unusual from normal conversations anyway Telephone conversation can be tapped by thieves and other people who intend to harm you or if they deem your conversations beneficial to their intent. It would be wrong to restrict the intelligence community to wiretap international calls that could otherwise provide them with important information concerning the national security on the basis that no one is supposed to overhear a telephone conversation between two people.

Conclusion
Wiretapping, a process whereby a telephone conversation between two people is overheard by others after electronically transmitting it to a hearing device have for long been used by the law enforcement agencies in their fight against crime.  The process was however, legally challenged by many who saw it as an infringement upon a persons right to privacy during communication. Regulations were introduced requiring that the law enforcement agencies obtain a warrant from courts before thy conduct a wiretap. Considering the current levels of insecurity globally, the issue have been revisited and many are now supporting for the legalization of wiretapping. Wiretapping will help the intelligence community obtain crucial information on matters of national security thus helping the government enact strict measures to avert attacks. The main reason as to why wiretapping should be legalized is that it will guarantee security for all Americans as all terrorists conversations will be detected.