Alrighty then, here's a good discussion right here. Freedom vs. Protection. Where a government's involved, this is always a major issue. Governments, to some extent, are created to protect its people. However, ofttimes, if not every time, this protection comes at the cost of personal freedoms. For a very obvious example, look to America's Patriot Act. This act essentially voids the American public's right's to privacy (aka, phone taps, unapproved searches, virtually baseless arrests) all for the purpose of rooting out terrorist activities. While this act definitely aids the government in protecting its people from the "ever-looming" threat of terrorism, it definitely conflicts with the people's rights. Some would find this acceptable, others find it horrendous. Patriot Act aside, every single law passed and enforced by a government comes at the cost of some freedoms. Many of these freedoms are pretty much worthless, and most people would have no problem in giving them up (for example, look at the laws preventing murder. These strictly inhibit one's right to kill whoever you want, whenever you want. Most people don't have a problem with that
)
So, here is a general discussion about the issue. How far can a government go to protect its citizens, short of turning them into a lifeless assembly line? How loose can a government be while still being able to be called a government?
Personally, I've always erred on the side of freedom. Protection is great and all, and, let's face it, downright necessary in this world (conspiracy theories aside), but I've found in my life that the cost of eliminating a threat is often greater than the threat itself. I find that many people... look at things at face value. They say "oh! This law will lower the rate of vehicular collision! Wonderful!". They don't see the fact that what they are approving of will also "even more strictly regulate the government's control over personal information, cause numerous other unforseen problems, and result in hoards of disgruntled teenagers craving independence". Of course, this issue deals with raising the legal minimum driving age.
I find that too much control results in a devastatingly dehumanizing experience, and turns a society of human beings into little more than a well-lubricated machine. Freedom is an amazing thing, but unfortunately, living without any protections is definitely not a feasible venture at this point in the human experience. To much chaos, as it were.
I know this topic can seem a bit... vague... without using some concrete examples, but hey, talk about whatever you think applies, government or otherwise! You can talk about drug restriction (yeah I see you rolling your eyes!), licensing issues, weapon restrictions, the rights of a government to take away private land, pretty much anything. There are pros and cons to everything here!
I really do think this is an important issue in society, one which, unfortunately, gets... overlooked.
So, here is a general discussion about the issue. How far can a government go to protect its citizens, short of turning them into a lifeless assembly line? How loose can a government be while still being able to be called a government?
Personally, I've always erred on the side of freedom. Protection is great and all, and, let's face it, downright necessary in this world (conspiracy theories aside), but I've found in my life that the cost of eliminating a threat is often greater than the threat itself. I find that many people... look at things at face value. They say "oh! This law will lower the rate of vehicular collision! Wonderful!". They don't see the fact that what they are approving of will also "even more strictly regulate the government's control over personal information, cause numerous other unforseen problems, and result in hoards of disgruntled teenagers craving independence". Of course, this issue deals with raising the legal minimum driving age.
I find that too much control results in a devastatingly dehumanizing experience, and turns a society of human beings into little more than a well-lubricated machine. Freedom is an amazing thing, but unfortunately, living without any protections is definitely not a feasible venture at this point in the human experience. To much chaos, as it were.
I know this topic can seem a bit... vague... without using some concrete examples, but hey, talk about whatever you think applies, government or otherwise! You can talk about drug restriction (yeah I see you rolling your eyes!), licensing issues, weapon restrictions, the rights of a government to take away private land, pretty much anything. There are pros and cons to everything here!
I really do think this is an important issue in society, one which, unfortunately, gets... overlooked.