re: forfeit their own liberty (liberty others died for) for a false sense of security
Excellent comment. Just like the argument for "gun control" the argument for additional collection of terrorist data might not be "effective" or "pragmatic" which might defeat the argument of sacrificing a little bit of freedom for safety/pragmatism/reality.
Consider 911. Where did the terrorists succeed? Where did they fail? Where did we succeed and fail?
The passengers in 3 planes trusted the Navy, AirForce, CoastGuard, NSA, CIA, FBI, INS, FAA and all government agencies to be their mommy and daddy and protect them.
The passengers in 1 plane over Pennsylvania took direct action in precisely the meaning of "militia" as that word is used in both the body of the constitution, and in the 2d amendment to it.
In a free country, the government must inherently realize that it cannot be everywhere and protect everyone. The government and the people who elect it must realize that it is up to us to protect that freedom.
We the people must realize it is up to us to protect and defend our freedom...since the politicians we elect are dead set on challenging them. Now we all know how incrementalism works and how politicians lie constantly.
Recall the first seat belt laws? We were promised that we wouldn't be pulled for a violation...rather we could be charged if we were pulled for something else. Well, that didn't very long. Now they set up roadblocks to see if we have our seatbelts on.
Just recently South Carolina was one of if not the last state to get on board with the seat belt law where LE can pull you over if they see a seat belt violation. In the first month 6700 hundred citations were written.
Some may recall how years ago there was no dui rather dwi. Some of the younger folks may not recall dwi...which is driving while intoxicated. That means the driver was visibly impaired and failed roadside sobriety tests.(walking the white line etc.)
Now comes the incremental factor. A new device can measure bac. Politicians pass a law that says a level of .15 is considered drunk regardless if the driver can pass the sobriety test. Politicians see the monies being generated with this .15 and realize that they can increase profits by lowering the level to .10...oh they're not done yet. Now reduced to .08 and still counting down.
Now guess what? Now some local jurisdictions realize even greater profits via zero tolerance...that means a .03 can get you jailed and is up to the discretion of the LE.
How bout you smokers. Have the laws of incrementalism affected you?
Now ask yourself just based on the samples cited where there are hundreds of other samples, how can we possibly allow the unpatriot act to stand? If we allow it to stand, based on the well established laws of incrementalism, who knows what they'll do next?