Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: barj
Perhaps, but maximum liberty is LESS secure.

True, but there has to be some security mixed with liberty or liberty won't exist at all. Without that security, people would be vulnerable to being enslaved by the first barbarian who comes down the road and beats them into submission.

But, is maximum security void of liberty? Probably, very nearly.

I would agree. North Korea is a prime example of it.

51 posted on 02/28/2006 10:37:57 AM PST by Dave Olson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: Dave Olson

"but there has to be some security mixed with liberty or liberty won't exist at all"

Yes. I'm not a total idiot, as there isn't total anything (Sad when you can't even be a perfect idiot :)). There is a balance and a give and take. Yes. I feel there are enough tools at hand (that is an opinion and I concede it may be wrong). I worry that every little thing that the gov wishes to implement will be done under the guise of security over the next few years. The NAIS is just that. Recently there was a post on this site about national ID cards, again, the issue of security is touted. 99% of these security measures are to keep us under thumb. There is little doubt they will make us more secure, but they will also make us less free. Perhaps I'm just a thrill seeker and wqant to live dangerously free without a safety net. I'm being silly (or sillier) of course, but the anology isn't far off. Everybody seemingly wants the gov to be the safety net. I don't.

Thanks again.


53 posted on 02/28/2006 1:10:05 PM PST by barj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson