[Discussion] Which one is more important to you,National Security or Personal privacy?

[HiddenSound]

National security but that only goes so far. No Big Brother stuff, please.

 

[The Necromancer]

National Security. People need to realize that privacy is bullshit.

Everyone is so self-centered that they actually believe their privacy matters. This country is far too lenient.

the problem with "national security" is that the government will eventually target people for disagreeing. When the US was founded one of the rights that the American people were given was the right to get rid of the government if we decide that it no longer works for us. Many people try to push this off as anarchy, if I were to support the idea of getting rid of our government I'd be considered a terrorist. And thus would find myself in prison, no trial, no due process and no rights what-so-ever.

That's not true at all. Maybe if you threaten with force, criminal intent and murder...

 

[The Mentalist]

CCTV is hardly the same as things in your own home, I don't know about you but I don't do anything in the street that I wouldn't want other people to see. I usually don't have my phone pointing straight at me and what are they gonna see anyway? My face? No problem there. As for microphones, what does it matter if people hear me speaking? They'll never find out about my plot to blow up the Houses of Parliament that way.

LOL man you right people usually take those stuff in secret places with no technology around them; all that Illuminati conspiracies.

They can see and hear you but as long as you say or do nothing suspicions like fapping to a certain character they wont come after you.

 

[fandum]

That's not true at all. Maybe if you threaten with force, criminal intent and murder...

Really? Tell that to the people that were attacked at Ruby Ridge by the federal government. You know what his crime was? Buying a shotgun from an under cover agent that was 1/2 an inch to short. They shot a woman in the face while she held her child all for that.

I'm sorry but I was in the military and know that the government is only there to protect themselves. Anything that they perceive as a threat will be dealt with. Heck they lie to the media ALL the time just to make Americans feel like they are "safe"

 

[The Mentalist]

Really? Tell that to the people that were attacked at Ruby Ridge by the federal government. You know what his crime was? Buying a shotgun from an under cover agent that was 1/2 an inch to short. They shot a woman in the face while she held her child all for that.

I'm sorry but I was in the military and know that the government is only there to protect themselves. Anything that they perceive as a threat will be dealt with. Heck they lie to the media ALL the time just to make Americans feel like they are "safe"

And yet people believe all that bullsh t that the media is saying.
It is like we are in a dream world unable to wake up.

 

[The Necromancer]

Really? Tell that to the people that were attacked at Ruby Ridge by the federal government. You know what his crime was? Buying a shotgun from an under cover agent that was 1/2 an inch to short. They shot a woman in the face while she held her child all for that.

I'm sorry but I was in the military and know that the government is only there to protect themselves. Anything that they perceive as a threat will be dealt with. Heck they lie to the media ALL the time just to make Americans feel like they are "safe"

I don't even understand your example. Links please.

I don't care what you were in, it's a fact that people are stupid and absolutely unable to handle sensitive information given out.

Did you know we missed a chance at catching Bin Laden because the government told its people that we had a phone number to track? Bin Laden saw this news and changed his entire network. The general public is made up of fools and imbeciles, and no matter how cynical you believe they are, the fact remains that no one is doing it better.

I don't see you changing anything with your infinite military wisdom.

 

[fandum]

I don't even understand your example. Links please.

I don't care what you were in, it's a fact that people are stupid and absolutely unable to handle sensitive information given out.

Did you know we missed a chance at catching Bin Laden because the government told its people that we had a phone number to track? Bin Laden saw this news and changed his entire network. The general public is made up of fools and imbeciles, and no matter how cynical you believe they are, the fact remains that no one is doing it better.

I don't see you changing anything with your infinite military wisdom.

To your first point

You must be registered for see links

Although I doubt you'll read it but there is the information. By the way the man they went to arrest, didn't go to jail because of how bad they screwed up.

Secondly I'm not saying that I have all the answers, only stating that I know first hand experience that our government lies. So not sure why but that sounds like you were trying to personally attack me.

 

[avenged sevenfold]

I'd rather have national security tbf

 

[Kenotthib]

I keep anything too personal in my head. National security is false security.
I'm gone.:bye:

 

[Aim64C]

Exactly as it says in the title,which is more important to you and why?

Individual liberty comes with a responsibility to that system of individual liberty.

I will -not- be compliant with a hijacker's demands. Any appearance of compliance is me brokering for the opportunity to turn the tables. I don't care if you are the pilot - I paid good money for a service that is currently being interrupted by a delinquent.

The problem is that people do not want to assume responsibility. Kids causing problems in the neighborhood? Get out there and tell them to get the **** off of your lawn. Pants around their ankles, shooting the place up with sideways-held handguns? Snipe their ass from your bedroom window - then laugh as his buddies trip over their attire.

People took the responsibility of their own protection and their own well-being and began passing it off to other entities. Then they are surprised when those entities try and obtain increasing amounts of information to try and carry out the mission of protecting people. Then they are outraged when that information gets used by corrupt individuals to extort, harass, and otherwise benefit an agenda other than the protection of the people.

While many would say that my above examples are a bit extreme - the point is that Vigilant Law Enforcement (or Law Enforcement through Vigilantism) should be encouraged. Under a limited government with laws that can be readily understood by the common person - the system is very robust.

By passing the responsibility along like we do, we create many of our own problems.

You do not have a direct right to privacy. There are certain things that cannot be done to you, and certain procedures that must be followed in order to go about conducting searches of your belongings.

The reality of all societies is that there is a sort of collective responsibility and effort that must be expended. You do have to concern yourself with the behavior of those around you, and you do have to show an interest in your community. Societies that fail to do this eventually fall apart.

Where a lot of places go wrong, currently, is the belief that government entities can fill this void. We make addictive drugs illegal rather than openly counseling people on abuse of substances - which drives the problems into the shadows. We give the state the authority to go in and take children away from parents rather than confronting abusive situations directly (and in the court of law, if necessary). We rely upon police to address criminal activity rather than standing as neighbors to expel the influence from our territory. We strip ourselves of knives, guns, liquids, and dignity to board a plane where a purpose-driven yahoo with a knife and agenda is allowed to have his way.

Let people carry anything they want to onto a plane. Have your chemical sniffers and other such things, if you want... but how do you think the next hijacking would go? "We are taking over this-"

"Seriously? Sit the **** back down and watch the in-flight movie before we paint your brains all over the commode, you douche."

How do we behave, now?

"Oh... guess I better do what he says. He screams loud and has a box cutter. I really don't like the idea of getting cut."

Pathetic excuses for sentient creatures.

 

[Jazzy Stardust]

Personal Privacy.

If all else fails and we are invaded I believe I can fend for myself and create a group with others to protect each other. The thing about National Security without the people having personal privacy is that the government will be more invasive and regulate your life under the guise of it being for national security purposes.

 

[YowYan]

National security. I really don't care what the government knows about me as long as they can stop terrorist attacks.

They are the terrorist.

 

[LED ZEPPELIN]

"If you want to give up a little bit of privacy for a little bit of security, you'll end up having neither."

You must be registered for see images

--George Washington

 

[LED ZEPPELIN]

If people have privacy, it means the people have power.
But if people don't have privacy, people won't have power.
A State where people have no power is not democratic.

So we can conclude that the United States of America is a dictatorship.

 

[LED ZEPPELIN]

The question is why did media cover up NSA scandal?

The media is ran by the same corporations and the same banks that finance the government.
The media is always siding with the government, trying to justify what the White House does with the so called news that are actually propaganda.

Then why in the world did the world's media focus on Edward Snowden, the NSA scandal and the Big Brother being the US federal government?
It's a challenging question but when you connect the dots you'll get the full picture.

To start with, try watching this video that is shorter than a minute.

You must be registered for see links

[youtube.com]

Get it? The NSA scandal is the small drive carefully sign while the house owners are we, the people. Eventually, we'll find out there's something even worse which would be the big drive carefully sign. We'll accept it, since we'd be already used to the small carefully sign (being watched by the NSA).

The NSA is a warning, it's telling us "get used to it!" and that's why media is shouting it so loud.

Eventually Big Brother will control us all and we won't even bother being not allowed to think in a not so distant future...

 

[vasu 32]

govt. don't give a shit about your personal stuffs to such a degree which you make out to be. And if I were to keep sth personal I wouldn't be putting it on the net to begin with. But still I prefer my pp than ns cause I don't live for my country but humanity.

 

[Funky Tiger]

National Security. I dont mind the government watching me masturbate passionately.

 

[YowYan]

National Security. I dont mind the government watching me masturbate passionately.

Maybe you should read up on what the Patriot Act, the NDAA, and internet restrictions bills stand for. Personal privacy does not only conclude being monitored while watching porn. Right now, in certain states in the u.s., collecting rainwater is illegal. Basically, living off the grid is illegal.

You must be registered for see images

 

[Funky Tiger]

Dude, i was joking back then.

Also, I think both are pretty equally important but i think constant terrorist threats slightly tilt the scale in security's favor.

 

[Sennin of Logic]

It doesn't have to be either or. Just the right balance. An extreme in either side would be a disaster.

If privacy is an extreme, then there can't be any warning for terrorist attacks.

If Security is an extreme, then once the system becomes a corrupt one, officials would then be able attack leaders of movements with blackmail if there were something. ect.


To be honest, the problems with internet monitoring has both its benefits and its faults exaggerated. Realistically, there cannot be enough people working in the government to check up on every single thing you post or do. They'd have to have a setting that searches for key words in order to identify a threat. In other words, it'll help with some crimes, but there's probably ways around it if the criminal's smart enough. That's how the benefit is exaggerated. Here's how the risk is exaggerated. As I've said, they'd be looking for key words in order to find threats. So in reality, unless you're doing something legitimately suspicious, you shouldn't be in the government's radar.



The way I see it, they should be allowed to search for threats, however, there should be some strict rule or organization to look over the shoulder of the investigators in case of corruption and abuse.