Posted on 12/29/2003 9:18:12 AM PST by NorCoGOP
MESA, Ariz. -- There appears to be a trend emerging in modern Western society. It is something that has been noticeable in the past, but is something that I think has become more prominent and disturbing in recent years. It is the habit we have developed of sacrificing personal freedom and convenience in favor of increased security, almost always in reaction to an isolated incident which we are afraid to treat as such.
Periodically, and with alarming frequency, something tragic will happen that will be greatly publicized. Perhaps this event injures or kills a person or many people; and, whether it is the media-driven American people demanding a change or elected officials eager to look like they are making a difference, precautions are put in place which restrict those very American people to the point that such an event recurring is nearly impossible.
The most dramatic of these events, with the most far-reaching internal effects, has been the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. I recall when our leaders assured us that the best way to fight the terrorists ourselves was to continue to live our lives normally and enjoy the freedoms that our enemies would wish to take away from us.
But our fear became a far greater opponent to our freedoms than any band of calculating psychopaths could ever achieve. And so things began to change.
As if to protect us from the inevitable eventuality of further hijackings, soldiers with machine guns took the place of obnoxious airport metal detector attendants. All luggage needed to be unpacked, studied, and repacked before transport on a passenger jet. My small Swiss army knife was instantly transformed from a personal convenience to a deadly weapon for terrorist use. Racial profiling became a very real law enforcement technique. And I can't get on a plane without taking my shoes off at the terminal.
Is this our normal life? Am I safer in my flight because my family and friends can't come and meet me at the gate? How has America gotten through 70 years of commercial flight without needing machine guns at every terminal? Are someone's socks really a threat to the lives of everybody on that plane?
As if this wasn't enough, our leaders drafted and almost unanimously passed the USA Patriot Act, 342 pages of knee-jerk legislation which has been adequately covered by this publication. For our own good, they removed any privacy that we think we have in favor of allowing the government to take any measures it deems necessary to discern any malicious intent any of us may harbor. I believe that all who study this act will be stunned at the constitutional rights the act takes away.
I don't want to be that safe. And an event occurring doesn't necessarily make it any more likely to occur in the future. Someone blowing up a plane doesn't mean that "people blow up planes now." I don't expect it. I am not afraid of it. And no amount of gun-toting servicemen or phone-tapping FBI agents will make me less afraid.
No amount of security is worth my freedoms, nor is it worth my ability to lead a comfortable, normal life. We have no alternative but to build our world to accommodate normal people. We can and should take reasonable precautions to protect ourselves from the dangerously insane. I think metal detectors are a great idea. But at some point we have done all that we can reasonably be expected to do and can only hope for the best.
For over 200 years, people have been giving their lives to obtain and protect necessary freedoms for the people of this country; because freedom is possibly the only commodity more precious than life itself.
Has you apartment been searched while you were off at the track? How would you know? Judges have been issuing warrants for years and years, how do you know it hasnt happened to you? Whats out there to stop them? Arent you living in deadly fear of "home invasion"?
But listen , don't fret so much. I'll send Ahmed over to give you a life lesson in "guilt by association". You'll love it!
Oh the horror! Bared feet in public! The injustice! The humiliation!
Why, I do so agree -- better a Richard Reid shoe bomber than bare feet in public! I'd so much rather be blown to bloody bits than suffer the indignity of exposing my feet!
And "seeing my insides"! -- I'm so overwhelmed at the thought of my duodenal ulcer being viewed by a stranger I can't even go there...
BTW, I know quite a few people who must fly on a regular basis, and none exhibit symptoms of "pathological fear," but they do make sure they're wearing clean socks, and I hear the pedicure business is booming. Maybe that's a symptom?
The proper response to the 9-11 hijackings would have been to arm the pilots immediately ... by Executive Order issued on 9/12/01. We could have saved $billions and saved our remaining freedoms, too.
Posting this essay is a a gyp because the antidote to hysteria about the Patriot Acts is to force the antis to go into specifics. How can we debate the author's points when they are not present?
And when the Patriot-Act-patriots decide to scour someone's medical records, tap his phone, and take his property, will that make him above average or below average?
So was I. The government is the police which is local law enforcement. I can club you and take your wallet more readily if I know the police wont come looking for me.
Look, this guy likes metal detectors but he doesent like to take his shoes off. Thats fine, but its not the big hysteria civil rights connundrum he makes it out to be. Oh, and I notice the obligatory complaint about "racial profiling". Yea, lets pretend humans cant be discerning and rational and un"prejudiced" when it comes to security. Whatever.
Exactly. The Constitution, both in original intent and in current practice, demands protections that at times limit the efficiency of law enforcement. That's fine. Profiling is one such law enforcement method. But the Constitution does not require the political correctness of banning a person's apparent race from the profile categories.
True, but if you remove law enforcement, anarchy and lawlessness will increase. Can you possibly argue with that? Take a look at Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire. You may be armed, but criminals become more brazen when they know the only danger is in the hit and run itself.
This whole argument is about degree. Selective and disproportionate hysteria is the author's main ware, IMO.
Walkin Man wrote:I'd certainly fly on such an airline.
Heres what I propose to remedy the situation.Create a new airline, call it Freedom Air.
No metal detectors, no screeners, no hassles whatsoever. Guns, explosive devices, knives, scissors, box cutters, shoe bombs, zip guns, etc... all welcome.
Then all the whiners can fly themselves and their families on it after signing a legally binding document that absolves the airline and the US government from all liability in case of a terrorist incident.
I also think that such an airline would operate without much risk of hijackings or other violence in the air.
The big problem is that it is absolutely illegal today to operate an airline in that way. That's the problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.