Need an argumentative essay on 205 Finals. Needs to be 4 pages. Please no plagiarism.authorizes a roving wiretap he/she should have some assurance that an innocent witness sensitive communications are

Need an argumentative essay on 205 Finals. Needs to be 4 pages. Please no plagiarism.

authorizes a roving wiretap he/she should have some assurance that an innocent witness sensitive communications are protected and that the court order is not an effective general warrant to be filled in later.

The issue presented by the article is about the potential of the Patriot Act to prevent acts of terrorism.

The article states that if the Act was available before 9/11, it could have prevented a potential attack against the United States from the terrorists.

There is no bias in the article. The information is well presented and there are sufficient information and evidence provided by the author to prove that the Patriot Act was very crucial in the prevention of a possible attack.

Although the article states that the terrorists left an electronic mail, some of the conversations provided are vague because they cannot ascertain who was being mentioned. The names included in the conversations are based on assumptions that those individuals were the one being targeted. It is imperative to note that the electronic mails did not give much of the information on the individuals put in parenthesis.

The first paragraph of the article uses figurative language to describe the United States as viewed by Jeffrey Leon Battle, a terrorist. The paragraph states “Homegrown terrorist Jeffery Leon Battle considered America the “land of the kaffirs,’ or unbelievers, and the American people ‘pigs’” (Jeffrey, 2008).

The author asserts that the Patriot Act was crucial in the prevention of a potential attack in the United States by the terrorists. “The Patriot Act was crucial … to prevent a potential attack within the United States …” (Jeffrey, 2008, p1).

There are contradicting statements within the article such as. an individual is allowed to own a gun but it has to stay unloaded and with a trigger lock and this defeats the purpose of the gun as a means of self-defense.

There are sections that need further clarification. the Second Amendment needs to