• Do Americans really prioritize security over freedom?
  • Do Americans really prioritize security over freedom
  • want security over freedom."

I feel that I could give up a little freedom to save a persons life. If this goverment security saves one life, then it's a success.

Individual Freedom vs the Safety of Society Essay - 768 …

The security vs. freedom debate - The Washington Post

by a conviction that sacrificing personal freedom could improve security
Our activities cover a wide range of security issues such as conflict prevention to fostering economic development, ensuring the sustainable use of natural resources & promoting the full respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Opinion for Freedom Watch, Inc. v. National Security Agency

AP CEO: Press freedom v. security a 'false choice' | …
Anyway, I enjoyed your article but I think you made a fundamental mistake and weakened your position when you claimed that privacy is uniquely human. More importantly, though, privacy vs. security is demonstrably not a zero-sum game.

 

Security v. Freedom by brittany may on Prezi


Having read all of the comments, I would like to add:
I think to a degree people are kind of missing the point. Bruce is talking about control. Think of all the minute ways in which the powerful and corrupt [be it government of free enterprise] have control over your life. Can you drink legally in public? You can in just about every other "democracy" in the world. How about the news? TV programs? Education?
Of course the last one is the key, several comments were made about the collective ineptitude of the voting public with regards to Bush and rights, etc. It is no coincidence. The "neo-con" movement have been targeting education for de-funding since the 60's. This is no conspiracy, they knew then, that an uneducated or under-educated electorate is more easy to control. Hence, why the corporate media is not held to it broadcasting agreements of providing for the public good, they are "censoring" news that is unfavorable to corporations and those in control.
Control [power] is the motivating factor in all of this, security is the anti-thesis of terrorism, it is a weapon or a shield depending on your point of view. I WOULD argue that most screening is irrelevant. Aside from TNT connected to a clock, or a gun on my person there is virtually nothing stopping a motivated individual from acting. An analogy I recently used: A gun in the hands of a cop is good, a gun in the hands of murderer is bad. Why are we looking for the gun, not the murderer?


When increasing privacy increases security or decreasing privacy decreases security, as in the case of these basic examples, privacy vs. security cannot be a "zero-sum game". In a zero sum game decreasing one must necessarily increase the other and vice-versa. That's what "zero-sum" means. Any other use of the term "zero-sum game" is just deceptive propaganda. Based on the quote in your article Ed Giorgio either doesn't understand privacy and security or he doesn't understand game theory (or he's engaging in deceptive propaganda, but why give him that much credit).


Freedom, security, and the police | RIGHTS ON THE …

I think there should be more conversation about what leads to becoming a totalitarian government, and what steps we have made toward that. Those steps should be discussed as a whole as well and consideration to whether there is a master plan being the guiding force. Most people see "loss of freedom" as something traded for being "secure", not as a step toward a much more frightening and devastating result.

Freedom of speech vs National security | Digital America

For people who choose to go along with the Security vs. Privacy debate and want to keep seeing it as one or the other, I think they should also ask what they get in return in case of unforseen events.

What’s More Important: Security or Freedom? - …

The sad truth is, when we give up privacy (aka control) to the government, it is inevitable that this control is turned upon us and lose our security from the very source that promised to us in the first place. We won't need Islamic Extremists to threaten our freedom. Our government will have removed the freedom, therefore removed the threat to it.

Freedom v. Security | My Own Thoughts

I think there should be more conversation about what leads to becoming a totalitarian government, and what steps we have made toward that. Those steps should be discussed as a whole as well and consideration to whether there is a master plan being the guiding force. Most people see "loss of freedom" as something traded for being "secure", not as a step toward a much more frightening and devastating result.