Is Big Brother watching?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by chasinfla, Jun 22, 2002.

  1. In case anyone wants to post comments or links about this menacing issue that we can't seem to do anything about, or that we sometimes persist in denying a) it's existence and/or b) its psychological, social, and economic ramifications.

    http://www.arhungary.hu/


    Go to <a href="http://www.autovu.com/website/flash/autovu4.html">this link</a> for a more dramatic introduction to this wonderful technology, and see how the other side (those who stand to profit or gain power) of this sees you. And me.
     
  2. Are you sure we don't need to be watched?

    See, at some point we Americans in our haste to make ourselves more secure, are going to have to decide how secure we want to be. If we want to keep terrorist out, then we're going to have to subject ourselves to things like license plate readers, racial profiling etc.

    Its just a fact. Either we give the authorities the weapons to make us more secure, or else we can't fault the authorities when another 9/11 occurs.

    I personally don't know what the answer is (and I hope I'm not straying too far from your original point), but I just thought it was an interesting question.
     
  3. eme

    eme

    Freedom is the ultimate security. One who trades freedom for security, deserves neither.
    My own thought is that government officials come and go, Some are good, some not so good, some are down right evil. Do you want to risk giving control of your life to the latter?
     
  4. I've been on both sides of this argument.

    I have come to this conclusion: were citizens allowed to bear arms, the World Trade Centers would probably be standing today.

    There is risk in allowing citizens their liberty (something our Founders believed was not government-given, but that all men were created with), and there is risk in taking them away.

    I know which risk I'd rather take.

    I'm sure <i>I</i> don't need to be watched.

    This is a nation of individuals united, not a homogenous 'we.'
     
  5. Wow you've opened up a can a worms. Unfortunately, I have to go play with my girlfriend right now, but you can be sure this thread will probably have a few more entries.

    Later,
    matt
     
  6. have come to this conclusion: were citizens allowed to bear arms, the World Trade Centers would probably be standing today

    Not sure I understand. If citizens carried firearms openly we could have prevented 9/11?

    Here in the NY,NJ area we have the stickiest gun laws in the nation, only the criminals have guns that aren't on any record system, as opposed to mine which are registered. I think it is because the law enforcement community doesn't want to be faced with an armed public because of their safety, not mine, so you aren't about to see any armed public around here in my life time, and if you did would that have stopped Mr. Atta?

    Again, not sure that's what you meant.
     
  7. What I mean is that an armed citizenry its its own best police force, ihmo.
     
  8. well, I always did love those Charles Bronson Death Wish films....
     
  9. i should say a well armed, mature and responsible citizenry (that doesn't watch too much tv)...
     
  10. OK, I'll bite.

    What new gun laws do you propose to insure that only mature and responsible citizenry are well armed?
     
    #10     Jun 23, 2002