Log in

No account? Create an account
What I say? Who knows me? What I said? What I am? disturbing.org.uk Previous Previous Next Next
Corrosive Shame
Therapy for Life
UnAmerican Security Measure?
From miss_soap

11 lies or Lie to me
From: ikkleblacktruck Date: January 9th, 2004 06:36 am (UTC) (Link)
A little over-the-top, I think. Is it PC to be anti-American these days? Whatever will the original poster do when biometric passports come in?
kneeshooter From: kneeshooter Date: January 9th, 2004 06:39 am (UTC) (Link)
My problem with it all is the scale of response. There has been a huge overreaction to to an event which, while very tragic, is little compared to a lot of the other problems in the world.
From: ikkleblacktruck Date: January 9th, 2004 08:38 am (UTC) (Link)
Would you feel the same way if you had been directly affected? The Americans always do everything big.

Is tighter security really an over-reaction in the face of terrorism? If it stops even one atrocity, is it not worth it?
kneeshooter From: kneeshooter Date: January 9th, 2004 08:40 am (UTC) (Link)
I feel like cutting and pasting from earlier comments about child abuse.

At what cost is liberty? If we remove crime from banning people from being on the streets is that a worthwhile trade? If not, where should you draw the line?
From: ikkleblacktruck Date: January 9th, 2004 01:09 pm (UTC) (Link)
If banning people on the streets will help, I'm all for it! They just get in the way of the cars anyway.

I'm interested to know what comments about child abuse you feel are pertinent.
kneeshooter From: kneeshooter Date: January 9th, 2004 01:20 pm (UTC) (Link)
I was referring to our previous debates about the cost to society of "protection" measures. If we locked up anyone who looked at a child, been accused of a crime, or Googled for "Osama Bin Laden" then we might, at the cost of our liberties prevent some crime.

I think it's too high a cost personally and have no desire to live in an extreme police or nanny state. We seem to disagree on this.
From: ikkleblacktruck Date: January 10th, 2004 03:42 am (UTC) (Link)
I don't remember supporting any of your examples per se, but there are obviously degrees in everything so I presume you are taking an extreme stance, which rarely works to prove a point.

Perhaps we should start by exploring just what "liberty" actually is? I mean it's obviously a concept subject to various conditions and limits, so what are the limits and who gets to decide what they are, and why?

Do you think you would be happier in an anarchic commune?
wulfboy From: wulfboy Date: January 9th, 2004 06:56 am (UTC) (Link)
I'm not sure it's possible to over-react to what is basically a (so far quite successful) attempt by the Americans to simultaneously increase their global influence while eroding as many of their domestic freedoms as they can get away with. My opinions on the Iraqui war are mixed, but my opinion of our own government is at an all-time low as they attempt to use the justification that another country is demanding degradation of our human rights as an excuse to start bar-coding us. Metaphorically. Any reaction short of aghast outrage might be considered under-reaction.
From: ikkleblacktruck Date: January 9th, 2004 08:40 am (UTC) (Link)
So it would be safe to assume you don't support a national identity card scheme?
wulfboy From: wulfboy Date: January 10th, 2004 06:07 am (UTC) (Link)
I would whole-heartedly support a national identity card scheme if I believe for one moment that it would a) have any measurable good effect and b) if I trusted the "government" not to abuse it. Bit like the death penalty, really.
littleonions From: littleonions Date: January 9th, 2004 08:11 am (UTC) (Link)
Thanks for the link, brilliant piece.

I'm not anti American, just anti biggotted arsehole religious freak powerhungry wouldbe empire builders, so it can seem that way sometimes:)
11 lies or Lie to me