because once a freedom is lost it is gone for good; men are corrupt and given more power they just become more greedy, more invasive ; history tells this story over and over; Hitler, etc.; you can fight terror without giving up your freedom; vigilantes in the name of national security only turn out to be the worse abusers; power corrupts, our forefathers saw this and wanted to prevent it ; they had been through the fires of persecution and knew what it was like and wanted a place free to live; up until 9/11 or Pearl Harbor we had security; we got caught with our guard down at least those in power; I remember the first time that I went to Europe and returned, I commented on how relaxed it was getting into the USA and that if they weren't quizzing me then they weren't quizzing others ; this was long before 9/11 ; common sense can prevail to keep us secure not relinquishing the fiber of our country to do it.
2007-09-11 00:54:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by sml 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Here we go the "if we're not safe then we have nothing" arguments. Well if you have no rights then you have no safety either!
National Security does not automatically mean free from restraint. It depends on context.
If there was a real war (not this made up war which is in reality a military occupation) on American soil and someone had something that would save the whole country then yes they have the right to do whatever needed.
Do they have right to break into my house and search it in peacetime just to make sure I am an ok guy with no plans to harm anyone? No
USA was founded upon the idea that the government would keep law and order and that people would be free to live their own lives as they saw fit...it was not founded on govt doing whatever it pleased to suit it's whims...in fact America was founded after fighting that very system of government.
Freedom without safety is dangerous and hard....safety without freedom is slavery and there can be no real life OR safety in slavery
regerugged> incorrect...I suggest you read Constitution again.
Ammendment 4 "The right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrents shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized". So govt cannot just come in and check you out for no reason...this protects your privacy from government intrusion
Amendment 9 "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain righs, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people". The list of rights here shall not exclude other rights the people still have.
It is government that is limited by the Constitution...not the people, by the intent of the founders! The Constitution is the framwork for the government and as such states what the government can do...all power comes from people..so people retain all power not granted to government.
2007-09-11 08:50:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The whole point of National Security is to protect our way of life. If we lose all kinds of individual privacy in the interest of National Security then we will lose the way of life it is supposed to be protecting. I suggest you go on Liberty's web site www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk and click on privacy. You could also look for stuff done on identity cards in the UK www. libdems.org.uk have a case against identity cards which give you reasons that put national security second. Hope that helps.
2007-09-11 07:56:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by happyjumpyfrog 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't agree with the premise of the question. National security is of the utmost importance. It is a life or death issue. Without national security, citizens could not count on individual privacy.
Privacy is not a life or death issue. It is not a "right" listed anywhere in the US Constitution.
2007-09-11 07:47:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by regerugged 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
You can go back into history and look up events in our own history such as:
Alien & Sedition Acts
Lincoln & violation of rights during tthe Civil war
The red scare.
The McCarthy Era
2007-09-11 08:22:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by DrIG 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
individual privacy is more important because it will hinder the country from prospering because of the scandals. instead of focusing on the problems in front of you. the country faces a detour. there. good enough?
2007-09-13 07:05:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by classnumber16 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I wholeheartedly agree that my rights are very important, but when it comes to the country's security, I think we all agree that it is utmost important. It has to come first.
2007-09-11 07:51:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by PATRICIA MS 6
·
0⤊
0⤋