I don't care what side your on. I'm not here to make anyone angry. Just answer this for me. In the case of domestic spying, do the ends justify the means?
2006-08-31 14:03:02 · 15 answers · asked by Ironic Destiny 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Yes, but it does need to be monitored and have over site.
2006-08-31 14:10:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
There has been domestic spying since there has been an America, and there always will be. Anyone that tells you otherwise is either naive or just plain stupid. Knowing that it doesn't really matter if the ends justify the means cause it will happen anyway.
2006-08-31 14:12:55 · answer #2 · answered by Wilkow Conservative 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No they don't.
I do understand their point of view, but what I don't get is how they are just using it to go after "terrorists" when they are getting so much more info about other crimes. I honestly don't think that they are being that finicky about the crimes - they are getting what they can get. And where does it end? As in the case with the wire tapping; if I say something against the current president to my best friend in casual conversation, and they happen to be choosing to listen to me that night, will I be labeled a terrorist? Or better yet - will certain things start happening to me (police pulling me over, credit suddenly being bad, etc)? It's a very tight rope to walk. And it is a rope that I don't think our government will walk on.
No one is saying that they need to stop investigating. But they are just going to have to do the leg work, like usual. When they have something, they can apply for a warrant for a wire tap, and then listen in to that specific suspect's conversation. It has worked for them in the past. Why is it so different now?
2006-08-31 14:39:37 · answer #3 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Good question, because I was just speaking with my coworkers on this subject. One of them was freaked out because you buy a tiny camera at radio shack and spy on other people in their home on a monitor at your home. Personally, I think it's creepy, and I'm paranoid that my landlord actually bought one and put it in my apartment. How would you feel about someone spying on you? But I think for the right reasons it may be OK, but it's still creepy how easily it could be done.
2006-08-31 14:24:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Noble ends do not justify criminal means, especially when legal means were just as effective and equally available.
Everything Bush and the NSA has done illegally could have been done legally under the existing laws. Everything. It just would have required a bit more paperwork, but it could have the same scope and be just as effective. Check the laws yourself.
Our government didn't break the laws because they had to. Bush just broke the laws because he didn't want to be bothered following them.
2006-08-31 14:07:13 · answer #5 · answered by coragryph 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
No because the end is the loss of freedom for citizens of this country and an authoritarian government. Benjamin Franklin said something like this; when people sacrifice their freedom to become safe they wind up losing both their freedom and their safety. This government is scary, and is trying to take away the freedoms that make out country what it is, or what it is supposed to be.
2006-08-31 15:09:23 · answer #6 · answered by irongrama 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Absolutely not. Because the means (removing our constitutional freedoms) destroys the ends (protecting our constitutional freedoms). So the means prevent the ends from being successful, and there's no "ends" left to justify.
2006-08-31 14:07:56 · answer #7 · answered by Charles D 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Absolutely not. That line of reasoning could be used to justify anything, such as burning down a house to kill a mouse. "Hey, the mouse is dead, so the ends justify the means."
2006-08-31 14:15:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
You mean like Watergate?
We have elections in a couple a months ... no, the administration shouldn't be allowed to spy on anyone it pleases.
2006-08-31 14:12:02 · answer #9 · answered by Sam 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
It depends on who's end your looking at. In some cases, it's against the law to be even lookin...
2006-08-31 14:08:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋