[Elvenblader]

The question I have for everyone is this. If your government could protect you from terrorist attacks like 9/11. Would you sacrifice your privacy for security? Since this will be the 5th anniversary of 9/11 what is your opinion security or privacy. Would you sacrifice one for the other?

[Aaron]

I think an equal balance of both is the best policy. The government should not invade privacy too much, but if they decide to search me, I wouldn't object. If it is a continuous spying operation, I think the government should have beyond a reasonable doubt that I am up to something. If it makes the country more secure for all of us, then I say go for it. If that means racial profiling, so be it. I wouldn't have any problem being racially profiled, I have nothing to hide. It is just a little inconvenience. I would go on, but I am short on time .

[Kaezion]

i've found that people who don't mind racial profiling in the U.S. are often white - as in, it doesn't affect them nearly as much as it does minorities.

but apart from that, i kind of agree with aaron. the success of the U.S. is very much based on finding a balance between respect for citizens' privacy and the urgency of security. not necessarily an equal balance, but a balance that allows the U.S. to remain a fully democratic (well, a democratic republican) state while being able to effectively counter terrorist activities.

personally, i think that's all there is to be said on this. this doesn't make for much of a debate. would anyone be so foolish as to recommend that the government crack down on its citizens? would anyone be even more foolish and recommend that the government pay no heed to security for privacy's sake?

[Neraphym]

I imagine Kaezion is correct about white saying they don't mind cops violating minorities. I am definitely one of those whites. If a cop is doing random searches, I'd rather he search the arab guy with the turban on rather than the old lady with parkinsons. I don't know about you, but I'm not placing any money on the disabled lady being a terrorist. Not every arab is a terrorist. Unfortunately, just about every terrorist is arab. I would rather inconvenience an arab than let a possible terrorist get on a subway/plane/train and blow my countrymen up. It is an unfortunate compromise that has to be made in these times. Obviously, during times of peace, these restrictive laws must be lifted.

[Kaezion]

the thing is, terrorism isn't like a war - you can't just start fighting it at a certain point and then end it. it is continuous, and you don't know when and where it will strike. this is why Bush's war on terrorism is so costly and drawn out; you can't blitz guerillas. blitzing requires accurate and precise knowledge of where to strike and how to do it, and the U.S. military knows neither of these two.

that is why it is hard to define the term "times of peace" when terrorism factors in the equation - civilization wages a constant war on terrorism, and a true time of peace will only come when every last terrorist is eliminated. sadly, this will probably never happen.

[Elvenblader]

Sounds like some people agree that we need to have a balance and that some inconvenience such as "Racial Profiling" is needed to find terrorists. But don’t you think that this is a little over the line when it comes to trying to find a terrorist?
Throwing out the balance idea. It's true there needs to be a balance, but if your government was spying on you, would you rather them tell you or would you rather have them keep it secret? I know people sometimes try not to racially profile, but how far would you let the government go before it crosses the line? In your opinion, what is that line and why would you care?

Sorry if I'm sounding like an idiot on this discussion. I wanted to get the opinions of other people, because it seems that the past few years of the administration of Bush have seen quite a few radical changes. Ranging from the illegal phone tapping to the Patriot Act.

[Neraphym]

Sadly, the government isn't the biggest threat to our privacy; its corporate America. Since the internet came out, companies have formed entirely dedicated to collecting every last bit of information they can about you, then selling it to other companies and the goverment. They even buy some information from the government at times. Most of the time, this is done entirely without your knowledge, or listed somewhere when you hit 'I Accept' without looking. I bet companies buy information about Osama and send him catalogues and spam to his cave, which is why he is so pissed at western civilization.

[Elvenblader]

I wouldnt be surprised if corporation(s) have reliable info on Osama Bin Laden. But trying to find out where that information is would be a doozy of a headache.

[Kaezion]

Sadly, the government isn't the biggest threat to our privacy; its corporate America. Since the internet came out, companies have formed entirely dedicated to collecting every last bit of information they can about you, then selling it to other companies and the goverment. They even buy some information from the government at times. Most of the time, this is done entirely without your knowledge, or listed somewhere when you hit 'I Accept' without looking. I bet companies buy information about Osama and send him catalogues and spam to his cave, which is why he is so pissed at western civilization.

[Bespetna]

There must be a fine line to this. Not too much security and not to much privacy.