i personally think safety comes before civil rights and im having trouble tring to prove it.
ithought of if one would rather keep their civil rights and a terrorist meeting secret and risk many peoples lives that wouldnt be good like stuff like that haha
plsss helpp
graciass
2007-12-19 03:33:14 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
The order vs. liberty debate has been going on for a very very long time. Typically, opinions tend to sway towards "order" in times of national crisis and "liberty" in times of relative peace.
This is a prime example of something that is ideologically sound, but in reality doesn't work.
Safety is important, of course. Who doesn't want to be safe? Question is, who decides what is "safe?" In the instance you're talking about, it's the government. Governments will always try to seize more power, it's in their natures. It's far easier to govern when people can't disagree and the government can do what it wants with impunity. The most beautiful and frightening thing about our Constitution is that it specifically respects the rights of the individual over the ease of the government.
Think about it this way - restricting civil rights might let the government find terrorists. I won't get into an argument about that. However, restricting civil rights also means that the government does not have to recognize your right for a trial by a jury of your peers, the right to remain silent, the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, to name just a few. Now, I understand that in certain circumstances the government already does this, but citizens can use their freedoms of speech, petition, assembly, and press to voice their concerns. What if the government started doing it to everyone? Who can say what is in the best interests of the nation and what is just in the best interests of the government? The government simply cannot be objective when it comes to granting itself more power.
Take it to an extreme - what would happen if we didn't have civil rights? What would go next? The right to life, or liberty? Scary thought!
2007-12-19 11:37:35 · answer #1 · answered by Soyana 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Only cowards would want to give up their civil rights. Once you lose your civil rights, the government can call and imprison anyone a terrorist without any proof. And then that person has no right to a lawyer and will rot in jail. There have always been bad guys meeting in secret, and somehow law enforcement have been able to investigate and arrest them without taking civil rights away from people.
Once your civil rights have been taken away, the terrorists have won, and our government will also become terrorists.
Fight for your civil rights, and the rights of your parents and children and grandchildren and great grand children. If you don't do what you can to protect them now, they will never know true freedom.
You cowards make me sick!
2007-12-19 03:41:43 · answer #2 · answered by Granny Jo 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
No you are wrong. Civil Rights is Safety in the US.
2007-12-21 14:36:48 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I understand where you are coming from but if you let the government or anyone break up any meeting they deem a "terrorist" function, they have the same right to break up when you and your friends are just hanging out.
2007-12-19 03:37:59 · answer #4 · answered by NycAtlPhilly 1 · 4⤊ 1⤋
That sounds like the motto of a future dictatorship who's main focus is not on protecting the rights of most people but rather the profits of the few.....
2016-05-25 01:02:36 · answer #5 · answered by kaley 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
maybe you are having trouble proving it because you are wrong in your beliefs. civil rights are the most important thing that a free person possesses.
2007-12-19 07:44:01 · answer #6 · answered by jenn 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No that's the road to dictatorship it is happening here in Britain i live in a nanny state that has just being sold out to the EU by the useless commie Brown.
2007-12-19 03:49:49 · answer #7 · answered by jack lewis 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree with you all the way. I myself am a person who believes in the law. I would rather give up some of my basic rights, than allow a terrorist group to assemble in my own neighborhoods. We need to realize as a society that we are not invulnerable to attacks, we are very much on the radar of our enemies. We need to let law enforcement and government have the tools that they need to allow them to hunt for these people that are trying to harm us. The only people that would not agree with this are the people who have something to hide. If you have something to hide from the government then maybe you need to be put on the suspect list. USA!!!
2007-12-19 03:38:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
I agree. I'm not going to get an email from a terrorist or send one. I have nothing to hide. The ALCU may have......?
2007-12-19 23:03:08 · answer #9 · answered by Ken B 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sorry, you're mistaken. You want to sell something precious and irreplacable for an illusion.
2007-12-19 11:21:23 · answer #10 · answered by gunplumber_462 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋