Undeserved Blessings of Liberty
In 1759, Benjamin Franklin wrote: “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Little has changed since, save for the speed with which many people will trade away basic freedoms in exchange for a fig leaf of protection. Three events last Friday suggest that fear generated by terrorist attacks is on the advance and liberty is in retreat.
On Friday, a British policeman shot five bullets into the head of an unarmed 27-year-old Brazilian man while horrified commuters at Stockwell subway station watched. The dead man’s crime? Running away from plainclothes police officers and wearing an unseasonably warm coat. The following day, the police admitted the man was innocent and sent their “deep regrets,” but announced that the terms of engagement would not be changed. Londoners are now faced with a conundrum. Who should they fear most: the terrorists or the government and its police force?
Later in the day, police in New York City began random dragnet searches at subway stations. The searches offer trivial protection at the expense of fundamental Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure. The police sought to assure everyone that the rights of minorities against profiling were being protected, never mind the rights of all New Yorkers. As Paul J. Browne, chief spokesman for the city police, explained it: “The protocol would be to pick the fifth backpack in ea
ch group of 10. If a Middle Eastern man is number four, he would not get checked.” Given this information, every terrorist has a 90 percent chance of penetrating police protection. Of course, should a terrorist be confronted by an officer, he has the option of detonating his explosives on the spot.
In Washington, D.C., panic festered just below the surface. Metro riders noticed a backpack without its owner and rightly brought the matter to the attention of the train operator. But the train passed through two more stations before Metro took action to inspect the backpack, which was later reunited with its owner, a child who had accidentally behind left the bag and the baseball caps it contained.
Meanwhile, according to one witness, commuters were “frantic” and “evacuating the last car, pounding on the train windows as they ran for the exits out of the station.” It is clear that one should not shout “backpack” in a crowded metro station due to the danger of causing a panic, even though all of the terrorist attacks against the United States and Britain have one common ingredient: the terrorists are suicidal and the deadly bags and planes were not unattended. The frantic commuters may be relieved to hear that Metro police are considering following in New York’s steps.
“I'd rather be watched and alive than dead with my privacy intact,” one New Yorker told a reporter in response to the random, ineffectual searches of personal property. Contrast that statement with “Give me liberty or give me death.” How far we have fallen, how undeserving we are of the price paid by those who signed the Declaration of Independence and faced death on charges of treason. We must ask ourselves: are we still the land of the free and the home of the brave?
On Friday, a British policeman shot five bullets into the head of an unarmed 27-year-old Brazilian man while horrified commuters at Stockwell subway station watched. The dead man’s crime? Running away from plainclothes police officers and wearing an unseasonably warm coat. The following day, the police admitted the man was innocent and sent their “deep regrets,” but announced that the terms of engagement would not be changed. Londoners are now faced with a conundrum. Who should they fear most: the terrorists or the government and its police force?
Later in the day, police in New York City began random dragnet searches at subway stations. The searches offer trivial protection at the expense of fundamental Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure. The police sought to assure everyone that the rights of minorities against profiling were being protected, never mind the rights of all New Yorkers. As Paul J. Browne, chief spokesman for the city police, explained it: “The protocol would be to pick the fifth backpack in ea
ch group of 10. If a Middle Eastern man is number four, he would not get checked.” Given this information, every terrorist has a 90 percent chance of penetrating police protection. Of course, should a terrorist be confronted by an officer, he has the option of detonating his explosives on the spot.In Washington, D.C., panic festered just below the surface. Metro riders noticed a backpack without its owner and rightly brought the matter to the attention of the train operator. But the train passed through two more stations before Metro took action to inspect the backpack, which was later reunited with its owner, a child who had accidentally behind left the bag and the baseball caps it contained.
Meanwhile, according to one witness, commuters were “frantic” and “evacuating the last car, pounding on the train windows as they ran for the exits out of the station.” It is clear that one should not shout “backpack” in a crowded metro station due to the danger of causing a panic, even though all of the terrorist attacks against the United States and Britain have one common ingredient: the terrorists are suicidal and the deadly bags and planes were not unattended. The frantic commuters may be relieved to hear that Metro police are considering following in New York’s steps.
“I'd rather be watched and alive than dead with my privacy intact,” one New Yorker told a reporter in response to the random, ineffectual searches of personal property. Contrast that statement with “Give me liberty or give me death.” How far we have fallen, how undeserving we are of the price paid by those who signed the Declaration of Independence and faced death on charges of treason. We must ask ourselves: are we still the land of the free and the home of the brave?
posted by The Libertarian Republican at 10:55 AM
1 Comments:
Actually, not much is new - the big difference is that the US government now is considerate enough to fully disclose their invasions of privacy and transgressions against the Constitution.
Nothing new - see the Palmer Raids, the WWI crackdown on the Wobblies, the Drug War, the Cold War, Hoover and the FBI, Nixon's Enemies List, Nixon's bugging his political opponents, LBJ bugging Goldwater, etc, etc.
Liberty does not come from the Constitution - it comes from the actions of those who are conscious of their own freedom. Words on paper have never been and never will be a guarantee of liberty.
Post a Comment
<< Home