The telephone tap got its name because the monitor was connection to the telephone wires and tapped off a small bit of the electrical signals in a conversation in order to gain knowledge by espionage. Telephone tapping, also known as wire tapping, is one of the many forms of espionage that the government uses to get what they want, such as information about a future bombing(s) or the secret to Auntie M’s lemon bars. By hooking up simple mechanics and listening devices to ordinary, run of the mill telephone lines, they are able to hear from miles around and know what every body (who is talking on a phone) is saying. Telephone tapping is a very unlawful way for the government to get information, the reasoning being unlawful because they are breaking their own privacy laws.
Telephone tapping seems (does show, not just seems, agreed?) to show that even the people who create laws, break them. The government will not informative (inform) if a telephone is being tapped, because it will cause no disturbance to the people using the phone, except for invading privacy.(which the do not know has been invaded…) That means that the people being spied on will not need to be informed on whether or not their phone is being tapping, because there would be no inconveniences. Most telephone taps create no audible sounds, they are extremely hard to detect. Invasion of privacy is against the law, but with a warrant, it is perfectly legal and there is nothing anybody except the police could do about it. If the government thinks that a bomb is in the making, then they have a decent reason to legally tap into phone lines (with a warrant). But, if the wiretap is illegal, meaning that the government did not place it there, and then it can and will be removed by the phone company. In order for the phone company to take care of the situation, they first need to find out if it was placed there by authorities or not. If it was placed by the government, you may ask them (the government) to remove it. If it was placed there illegally, they would remove the tap and then turn the situation over to the authorities so that they may find who put it there. However, both types of telephone taps are cause the same invasion of privacy. (this is good information, but there is a lot of redundancy in there. You might want to instead expand on the legal issues, like how the government decides who to tap and who not to.)
Many people are not pro wire tapping for very good reasons. A man of high power once said, “As a means of espionage, writs of assistance and general warrants are but puny instruments of tyranny and oppression when compared with wire tapping” (Justice Louis Brandeis, 1928). This statement, although opinionated, displays that even members of high authority (can) be con (against) wire tapping. A theory is that most of the government applauds telephone tapping because they known that they can use the same excuse. That excuse is that they can prevent another 9/11. Although that may be true, tapping into people’s private lives is not really preventing anything either. A wiretap could be used to tap into a believed terrorist’s phone line, whether they lived in Nebraska or Nepal, to see if they had any information about a past or future bombing. (can the U.S. really tap a phone legally in another country?) The tap would be placed on a phone line by the FBI, or some other division of the government. (we learned this in previous paragraph) So far, telephone tapping has not prevented, or prepared, America for anything. An illegal wiretap could be used by anybody for any purpose. It could be used to spy on a cheating spouse or on a child that is suspected for ditching school. (is this not illegal? The gov. would certainly not be interested in personal family matters, no?) The reasons are endless, but the outcomes are always the same, whether or not the person (who’s phone was tapped) is sent to prison or gets money for suing the tapper.
There are laws in certain places that forbid taping a telephone conversation. In California, it is illegal and against California Penal Code 623 to record a phone conversation unless all parties are willing and will consent. Meaning, that if the government was monitoring and recording your phone conversations, and you didn’t say that it was okay, they would be breaking the Californian law. Other states with the same law include Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington. (you could expand on the legality of this issue, so the reader knows exactly what is and isn’t legal and how the gov. can do this)
Due to the unwarranted government tapping of phone lines, it leads to be con wire tapping due to consent from only one side of the recorded conversation. Invasion of privacy, and more laws still do not stop the use of government and illegal telephone tapping are just some of the many reasons to be con wire tapping. (Maybe could have expanded more on privacy laws and tie it into this issue.)
“Telephone Tapping.” (2009) Wikipedia. May 7, 2009 from:
“Wiretapping and Eavesdropping on Telephone Conversations: Is There Cause for Concern?” (2009) Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. May 7, 2009 from:
“Wiretapping.” (2005) Electronic Privacy Information Center. May 7, 2009 from: