+

Answer Overview

Response rates from 914 Louth voters.

25%
Yes
75%
No
11%
Yes
73%
No
8%
Yes, but only by court order
2%
No, and enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications
4%
Yes, but only for those with criminal backgrounds
2%
Yes, this is necessary to combat terrorism

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 914 Louth voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 914 Louth voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Louth voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9ZHHRQCanswered…3wks3W

Yes, the option should be available in order to combat terrorism, but this should be done with independent oversight, and a warrant from a judge should be required in order to monitor a given individual from the public.

 @9ZGZHSManswered…3wks3W

Yes, but only in extreme circumstances and must be approved by a judge and must be done so against a person suspected of a serious crime

 @9HM7ZJWanswered…12mos12MO

They should not monitor phone call or emails. However, if a person has history of criminal activities and terrorism. They have lost their rights to privacy therefore, it should be monitored

 @8RLNYM8answered…4yrs4Y

No, because even if that could be useful in certain circumstances, it is too great of a risk if it falls into the wrong hands

 @8PCGVVKanswered…4yrs4Y

Yes but ONLY for those who may be involved in terrorism or crime. If no evidence can be found after a period of a month or two then all surveillance must be stopped at once.

 @8C5RDBVanswered…4yrs4Y

No, unless they have a court order and limited to individual persons suspected of a crime.

 @8C5RDBVanswered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but only by court order and limited to individual persons suspected of a crime.

 @beauchurleyanswered…3yrs3Y

Yes, to counteract subterfuge by foreign by US Jewish interests and Israel (and possibly others less powerful/capable of subterfuge).