Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno
Sadly, I agree with you...and Ben.
Either way you look at it, we're not in a good scenario. If we don't boost safety, we are in more danger, if we do boost safety we then we infringe on rights. It's basically a catch 22. Fact is, we have been "hated" so long that this was bound to happen. That's what happens when you're #1, everyone wants to take you down a peg. This is why every great government in history has failed at some point. Make no mistake about it, this one will too.
|
Yes, it is a catch 22 -- you can't have both. I just wish America would understand that. IMO, it is one of those very rare absolutes. If you sacrifice any liberty for security, it is only a matter of time until you have no liberties -- and therefore no security.
I think those quotes offer good insight into the minds of the Founders, and the purpose they saw for the government. It is clear to me that the Founders did not deem personal security a responsibility of the government. Instead, the government's role was to ensure that the people's liberties were protected. I guess we have just gotten lazy and weak over the years, and now we expect the government to protect us.