There was an article that said that in 2007, the government sued amazon.com to obtain book purchase records from Amazon customers. Judge Stephen Crocker said “the subpoena is troubling because it allows the government to peek into the reading habits of specific individuals without their knowledge or permission. It is a disturbing and un-American scenario to imagine federal agents snooping through the reading lists of law-abiding citizens while looking for evidence against someone else.” This article questions citizens' constitutional rights of the 4th and 9th amendments, warrants, and privacy: Should the government be able to examine private records showing purchases and other private activities of citizens without warrants? Adams, Mike. “The US government's Big Brother is suing amazon.com to obtain records of customers' book purchases.” Web.A recent article states that trijicon, inc. a company that makes combat rifle sights for the U.S. Army will send kits to the Army to remove biblical inscriptions that have been put on the equipment. The company originally cast these biblical inscriptions into metal, but decided to remove them when rifle sights raised concerns in Iraq and Afghanistan. I think this article is about the First Amendment, the Establishment Clause, and the Free Exercise Clause: Should a company that supplies products to the government be able to display religious texts on its products? NBC News. “Defense Contractor to Remove Biblical References.” Web.A recent article states that in Minneapolis, a man put up posters near a mosque and a Somali-owned store, showing anti-Muslim images. Two Minnesota prosecutors decided not to press charges because… middle of paper… surveillance, claiming they were only looking at certain people, when in reality it was a much broader spectrum.Argument 3-Yes , the government provides tons of information about people in the country every second, but does this really help them? Well, obviously more information is not as useful as important information. This is evident when on 9/11 they had tons of evidence and warnings that a terrorist attack was happening in the country, but so much information was coming in that they were unable to sift through it to find the important information. . So obviously it's not as effective as you would think. Bottom line: If you're going to do something, at least limit it to what you said you would do. The government clearly did not do this by spying on its citizens, thus calling into question the trust that its citizens can place in it.