The Security Vs. Freedom

Flags burning under raining bombs, gunshots echoing through a field of raining terror, while hiding underground for the day where humanity can roam free again; situations as so aren’t exactly what people imagine when thinking about one’s future. Every death was honored by those who lived; lives lost during wars of any kind are unlike lives lost in our country today, not for the value of those once living are greater than another, but from how much those lives mean to this day. Establishment and preservation of freedom wasn’t easy and will never be easy; many people served until their last breath, for the freedoms of our lives today. That is why we must continue to grasp for freedom, and to establish and preserve our freedom most effectively we must have the heart to be free, and have united dedication to freedom itself.

In U.S., the bill of rights protects civil liberties. People in the United States, hold civil rights, which are those privileges, immunities and rights held by all Americans and political rights, which are the rights that are restricted to those who are entitled to participate in elections, as candidates or voters. The distinction is important since not all are eligible to vote though they all should enjoy their freedoms. This may no longer be feasible as majority of the civil rights are taken to include the political rghts in this age.

Our world today is filled with unnecessary oppression. Slavery is one common form of human oppression, but there are numerous other forms as well. War, death, hunger, and sadness caused the elders in the society of The Giver to force each citizen to live extremely structured, controlled lives. That structure and control effected each person’s ability to live unique, private, and free lives. The elders in The Giver wanted all the citizens in the community to be undifferentiated for their own safety, so they greatly censored all citizens. Lack of freedom to pursue individual happiness is, indeed, a form of oppression not only faced by fictional book characters, but also by twenty-first century Americans. American society is changing so rapidly that we as independent Americans must decide whether safety, or freedom, is more important.

The power or right to act, speak or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint. A word created by man to escape the bonds of tyranny to express the idea of what it means to persist one's own ambitions. Freedom. Freedom is not the absence of confinement but the will to achieve freedom when imprisoned. After carefully concluding the reading done over this semester one is able to clearly understand the confinement these early Americans felt and their decision to achieve a form of freedom. Freedom has always existed but it is the history of this nation that will define what actions freedom takes.

A paradox has always exists between the issue of civil liberties and national security. Democracy creates civil liberties that allow the freedom of association, expression, as well as movement, but there are some people use such liberal democracy to plan and execute violence, to destabilize State structures. It illustrates the delicate balance existing between reducing civil liberties to enhance security in a state. States have detained suspects for years and have also conducted extensive privacy incursions as strategies to combat terror, however it risks violation of civil liberties. This essay discusses the extent to which a state should be allowed to restrict civil liberties for the enhancement of national security and not abandon democratic values. It looks at aspects of the legal response to terrorism in the United States after the 9/11 attack.

What is homeland security? The exact definition of homeland security is “Precautions taken by the government of specified country against terrorist attacks” according to Dictionary.com. However, when it comes to protection, are the people of the US willing to give up their natural civil liberties? The civil liberties, found in the Bill of Rights, are the people’s fundamental rights; such as freedom of speech, religion, and even privacy. These rights are protected by law against unwarranted governmental interference on their lives. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”(from npr.org).

The individual liberty which is liberty of an individual to exercise freely those rights generally accepted as being outside of governmental control is considered as the reason why criminal activities/offences are still occurring. To deal with this problem, the government passes laws or regulations to make our society safer. In this paper, the author would like to discuss the reason why public safety is much more fundamental than individual liberty.

Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the United States, once said “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In America’s society today, some are willing to sacrifice their civil liberties in order to gain protection and security over some potential threat. Especially after the events of September 11th and several attempted bombings in U.S. cities. This sacrifice of individual freedoms such as the freedom of speech, expression, the right to information, to new technologies, and so forth, for additional protection is more of a loss than a gain. Citizens of the United States deserve equal liberty and safety overall, as someone should not have to give up

Those who give up liberty for the sake of security deserve neither liberty nor security

Benjamin Franklin once said that, “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." The Fourth Amendment established that citizens have a right against unreasonable searches and seizures, although rising technologies raises the question: when does national security infringe upon individual liberty. Much of the conflict has to do with the schism between the influencing ideologies classical republicanism and natural rights. The interpretation on how far this right extends has been heavily debated.

Is the National Security more important than individual rights? The National Security is right, because they needed Apple to unlock the phone for a good purpose.

I believe national security is more important than privacy because it lowers the threat of terrorism and ensures the safety of the American people. Even though national security includes the invasion of citizen’s privacy, if it could prevent a national crisis, why shouldn’t it be implemented? Many Americans favor privacy over security because they claim it violates their constitutional rights. However, would you rather the government detain a suspected terrorist before an attack like 9/11 happens again or would you rather have it happen and leave your nation defenseless?

I negate the resolution, "Resolved: When the United States is engaged in military conflict, national security ought to supercede conflicting claims of individual rights. My value for the round is Human Dignity, or what can be defined as a respect for the individual and his or her rights and virtues. John Stuart Mill states that "Everyone who receive the protection of society owes a return for the benefit... but not to the point that it violates constituted rights." Thus those rights which are the fundamentals of human dignity must be maintained. No fundamental goal should ever undermine this fundamental goal. The criteria which must consistently achieve is the maintenance of a legitimate government, or a govt. that maximizes the rights of

Place yourself in the safety and comfort of your home, under the belief that “everyone has the right to the use and enjoyment of his property” (Department of International Law), searching, emailing, and talking about things that may be frowned upon by others. Now imagine the raw feelings of fear and deception that would wash over you upon seeing Edward Snowden’s statement on how “the U.S. government is destroying privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they 're secretly building.” You may initially feel betrayed, but Obama formally announced that the NSA acts solely in the name of safety right? Have we begun to sacrifice the freedom and

Public safety is considered to be an important task of criminal justice officials. However, their tactics in achieving it are criticized for their ineffectiveness due to destabilizing effects on individuals that continues on into communities. Public safety is largely associated with strong social cohesion Thompson (2013), states that disturbances in social and support networks result in an instability in communities. Informal and formal social control is needed to ensure safety and stability dismantling informal social networks heightens the vulnerability of individuals. For stabilization to occur in neighborhoods creation and maintenance of informal social networks and structure must be maintained to ensure that crime and violence is minimalized. The success of public safety is highly reliant on the individual through there interactions with the community. Social cohesion reinforces a set of prescriptive norms that further unite individuals within a neighborhood and contribute to a sense of collectivity that causes social control. This essay will argue that policing strategies used as a tool for public safety, have negative implications on human capital and social capital when combined they further impact collective efficacy. Human capital is demonstrated as being implicated by policing strategies through highly individualized practices that depend on race and class. Social capital is undermined through estrangement of police and lack of legitimacy that has negative impacts