Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Liberty versus security
Liberty versus security
Benjamin franklin republic quotes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Liberty versus security
Benjamin Franklin once said, "Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Even so, people will do anything for the safety of themselves and others and still deserve both liberty and safety in return. After terrorist attacks and shootings, people would give up anything, even liberties, to know that they would be protected. Carroll Doherty wrote, ¨Most recently, in 2010, 47% [of U.S citizens] said they were more concerned that government policies ´have not gone far enough to adequately protect the country,´ while 32% said they were more concerned that ´they have gone too far in restricting the average person’s civil liberties,´¨ (Pew Research Center). Some people are …show more content…
They are only willing to give up liberties because they are scared which is a totally reasonable decision. They just want to ensure the safety of themselves and the people they love. Although some would say that they agree with Franklin's quote, and that those who would give up an essential liberty does not deserve liberties or safety. People that are willing to give up civil liberties are giving more power to the government. To make themselves feel more secure, they are willing to allow the government to do whatever they want. Harry J Enten stated, ¨The Patriot Act, for instance, has been regarded by some as a necessary step for safety and by others as an infringement on civil liberties,¨ (The Guardian). It forced people to give up their freedom of privacy, and was frowned upon by many American citizens. Those who are willing to give up an essential liberty such as freedom of privacy do not deserve to have that liberty in the first place. A common view is that if people are willing to give up liberties for temporary safety. they do not deserve safety or liberties at all. This position seems reasonable because our liberties are something we treasure in this
In her essay “We should relinquish some liberty in exchange for security,” Mona Charen, a columnist and political analyst, speaks on the issue of security in the United States of America. She uses many significant techniques in her essay to persuade her readers of her argument. However, I feel that her essay fails to make a great argument because she relies heavily on assumptions, misses opportunities to appeal to pathos and ethos, and overall uses a degrading tone.
“We have to make a balance between security and civil liberties.”(Sensenbrenner 2). The patriot act was passed with very little congressional debate. The public was unaware of its passing. Our security is over protective because rights are being broken. Our rights should matter more to the government because the security is overprotective. Is the patriot act too harsh and invading our privacy?
The aftermath of the attacks on September 11 demonstrated that this was necessary. The Constitution is not designed to render the nation defenseless against people who have no value for human life, and who will use whatever means necessary to harm others to advance their goals. In conclusion, the Patriot Act gives the government the tools in which are necessary to keep America and its citizens safe.
Everyday we have the chance to make her own opinions and give reason to our own voice. We have the chance to live in a country that encourages freedom in society, which separate ourselves from any restrictions imposed upon by authority, actions or any political views. liberty is the power we possess to act as we please through freedom and independence. But what happens when we choose to give away our basic liberties for temporary safety? Benjamin Franklin once stated, “They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Those who decide to give away their personal freedoms for something that is temporary do not see the value in the long-lasting gift called freedom. In
From the beginning, the United States Constitution has guaranteed the American people civil liberties. These liberties have given citizens rights to speak, believe, and act freely. The Constitution grants citizens the courage to express their mind about something they believe is immoral or unjust. The question is, how far are citizens willing to extend the meanings of these liberties? Some people believe that American citizens take advantage of their civil liberties, harming those around them. On the contrary, many other people feel that civil liberties are necessary tools to fight for their Constitutional rights.
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” This quote from Benjamin Franklin illustrates how an emphasis on safety can drastically reduce the freedoms enjoyed by citizens of the United States, especially the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which states that “...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” However, with active shooter situations such as Columbine; the Tucson, Arizona shootings, which nearly killed former Representative Gabrielle Giffords; and recent situations at Newtown, Connecticut; Los Angeles International Airport; and Westfield Garden State Plaza mall in New Jersey, the federal government has questioned this right guaranteed to us as U.S. Citizens. In Congress, it is a back-and-forth battle between the Republicans, who favor less gun control legislation and a literal translation of the Second Amendment, and the Democrats who would like to see more gun control legislation to protect the safety of citizens. However, more gun control legislation would punish law-abiding citizens, be a direct violation of the Second Amendment, and expand the power of the federal government into areas where the Founding Fathers never wanted it.
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 one value in order to gain another. This concept of individual right goes beyond the simple idea of “individual comfort.” Personal liberties cannot be surrendered and are not to be compromised since these liberties are intangible. Individuals should not have their personal liberties exchanged for national security because individuals are guaranteed protection to these rights.
This is not what the Patriot Act was passed for; they have gone over their limits and are getting involved with things that don’t entirely concern them. This is exactly what infuriates the people because they are getting out of their boundaries to make a big fuss out of some minor crime that has nothing to pertain to terrorism. While the Patriot Act was put into place to stop terrorism, it has had a nasty after math. People suspected of terrorist activity have no civil rights. They are put in prison and held without due process regardless of whether they are innocent or not. This is just wrongful imprisonment because they don’t have a valid reason as to why they would put an innocent civilian behind bars. This act just concerns the people by any rational assessment. The power given to the government to conduct surveillance on citizens is just against the constitution because we have no privacy. The government is off-track and is labeling anyone as a suspected terrorist and will collect information about them. We are living in a society where slowly and slowly we’re going to lose most of our rights and be told what to do. We are gradually going to become somewhat close to a dictatorship and lose all of our rights. The Patriot Act also allows the above-mentioned sneak and peak warrants to be used for any federal crime,
One of the longest lasting debates in the United States is the struggle to balance freedom and safety. Throughout history there have been instances were freedoms have been suspended- whether for the better or worse- because the United States was in a time of crisis. The Quasi War against the French, the Civil War, and the First World War were events where presidents found themselves under fire because of their controversial suspension of certain constitutional rights. Should certain freedoms be curtailed in times of crisis? This debate has always been so controversial because there has never been a majority one way or another. There have always been people for suspending freedoms to preserve safety and at the same time there have always been people that have believed that freedom is ultimately more important than safety.
Freedom in the United States Essay submitted by Unknown No other democratic society in the world permits personal freedoms to the degree of the United States of America. Within the last sixty years, American courts, especially the Supreme Court, have developed a set of legal doctrines that thoroughly protect all forms of the freedom of expression. When it comes to evaluating the degree to which we take advantage of the opportunity to express our opinions, some members of society may be guilty of violating the bounds of the First Amendment by publicly offending others through obscenity or racism. Americans have developed a distinct disposition toward the freedom of expression throughout history. The First Amendment clearly voices a great American respect for the freedom of religion.
Freedom is having the right to own, act, think, and speak without any restrictions from the outside. Ever since the New World was discovered, people have been fighting for their independence till this day. People of other colors and race have been forced to do labor without their consent. Today, those same people have been blamed or accused of crimes that were not committed by them despite of being free. Freedom has different meanings and those meanings change overtime; however sometimes the significance of freedom does not change.
There are a number of reasons why this freedom needs to be protected. The number one and most important is to keep the individuality of the American people from becoming controlled by the Government.
Tension between freedom and security has been prevalent in America since its founding. In 1798, President Adams responded to the threat of war with France with the Sedition Act, which made opposition to the government practically illegal. During the Civil War, President Lincoln suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus to prevent disputes regarding the legality of arrests. President Roosevelt authorized Japanese internment during World War II. Clearly, our government has often felt at liberty to put personal freedoms on hold for safety and control.
In the world today, the Patriot Act states that it protects U.S. citizen's freedom. Iby ensuring the FBI's ability to examine anybody's daily activities. To me, this is a major contradiction. The Patriot Act is basically saying that the government has the ability to now control our freedom. According to the Patriot Act, law enforcement has the ability to access highly personal files such as medical, financial, and student records. This goes against the maxim freedom is slavery because this act is saying that it is ensuring American's freedom by allowing government officials to have surveillances on our everyday life. This is threatening many of our amendments. Some of our rights being threatened include the First Amendment: our freedom of religion, speech, and press. The Fourth Amendment is also in jeopardy, which is our freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. Other Amendments in jeopardy include: the Sixth Amendment that allows due process, the Eighth Amendment that protects citizens from cruel and unusual punishment, and the Fourteenth Amendment that gives equal protection laws to everyone. Other instances that challenge the freedom vs. slavery maxim came when the president talked about amending the constitution concerning marriages. As of right now, America can choose who they want to marry. This represents the freedom Americans have now. If this is passed, then the government will be able to decide whom the public can marry. When I say, "who the public can marry," I mean as far as same sex marriages or traditional man and woman marriages. This takes away the freedom of expression that society has today and replacing it with rules and regulations, symbolizing slavery. The government has made society today feel the need for protection.