liberty vs. security (1 Viewer)

[flaherty12]

how far should the government be allowed to go in order to make a safer america?

 

[1069]

how far should the government be allowed to go in order to make a safer america?

IMO, they've already gone too far.
The Patriot Act was too far.

 

[earthworm]

Under ideal conditions, I would be totally against all this security crap.
But, as long as there are criminals, Islamists, nazis, facists, racists, illegal Mexicans,ect,around, a certain amount of "privacy", and "rights" must be sacrificed.
An alternative is to turn our country into a police state - which, of course , is even worse..
The security level could be better; we need a national ID data-base; this is coming, its a matter of when...

 

[SpooK]

IMO, they've already gone too far.

How have they gone too far? I dont think the government has done jack **** to increase our security. There are so many ways our country could be infiltrated with just a little bit of effort. How about importation of goods, water supply, food supply, chemical/biological factories, etc. How has the government went too far in these major aspects of homeland security. What precautions were made and what sort of emergancy action plan does the US have in effect for such an attack?

Dont get me wrong. I dont walk around scared all day or anything like that, but I do think the next terrorist attack will be in the not so distant future.

 

[flaherty12]

i think that as long as security measures dont violate the constitution, they are ok

 

[disneydude]

i think that as long as security measures dont violate the constitution, they are ok

The problem with this is that we are living in a time when there are a large number of people who are seeking to destroy our Constitution. The right-wing and the Bush Administration have taken huge steps in this direction beginning with the Patriot Act and leading on to Bush's spying and now his stated intentions to open citizen mail if he deems "exigent circumstances".

I would agree with your post....but when you have an administration that believes that they can interpret the constitution as they wish by issuing a signing statement...they aren't going to find any of their measures violate the constitution.

Combine that with the fact that Bush has been able to appoint two Activist Judges to the Supreme Court that have a history of supporting large corporations and the government against the rights of the citizenry....and I think you can begin to see how that option is not really a legitimate choice.

 

[nort_12345]

the gov. has gone too far w/ the patriot act and taking away almost everything on airplanes. this similar to 1984. the gov. scared the people into giving up their rights and liberties so that the gov. has all of the power.

 

[Hatuey]

the gov. has gone too far w/ the patriot act and taking away almost everything on airplanes. this similar to 1984. the gov. scared the people into giving up their rights and liberties so that the gov. has all of the power.

Whats with you and planes? Are you pissed off because you can't take your nail clippers on a plane? Live with it. Everybody else has to. I fly back and forth from Canada atleast once a month. Unless you do that much flying I dont think you're bothered by any of the inconveniences of flying.

------------------------------------------------------

On that note. I think this is one of those times where SpooK and I are on the same page of things. This goverment is all about theatrics. They take the measures they take simply for shock value. Every time this administration comes up with a new measure to stop terrorism the ACLU's mouth starts watering. They're guaranteed work for another year. They get all up in the ACLU's panties while at the same time doing nothing to stop terrorists. Forbidding me to take my mouthwash on a plane isn't going to stop a terrorist from crossing the desert or drive down from Canada. The possibility that a terrorist might already have come through through the 100s of miles of unprotected border we have with Mexico is almost none existant to the people in the White House.

 

[Skip]

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 

[Dezaad]

I am fine with anything that is Constitutional, but I wanted to select "They have already gone too far" along with it.

 

[conserv.pat15]

What don't you like about the Patriot Act... Can someone cite where the Patriot Act violates the Constitution?

 

[nort_12345]

Whats with you and planes? Are you pissed off because you can't take your nail clippers on a plane? Live with it. Everybody else has to. I fly back and forth from Canada atleast once a month. Unless you do that much flying I dont think you're bothered by any of the inconveniences of flying.

------------------------------------------------------

On that note. I think this is one of those times where SpooK and I are on the same page of things. This goverment is all about theatrics. They take the measures they take simply for shock value. Every time this administration comes up with a new measure to stop terrorism the ACLU's mouth starts watering. They're guaranteed work for another year. They get all up in the ACLU's panties while at the same time doing nothing to stop terrorists. Forbidding me to take my mouthwash on a plane isn't going to stop a terrorist from crossing the desert or drive down from Canada. The possibility that a terrorist might already have come through through the 100s of miles of unprotected border we have with Mexico is almost none existant to the people in the White House.

it's not nail clippers that i'm upset about. it starts w/ the nail clippers, and then leads to other things. if it continues, we will end up like a 1984 society.