It wasn't about that, was it? Not to belabor the point, but the original point was that living with the risk of a terrorist event was worth the protection of our freedoms.
That's not the same thing as standing in front of a tank because it's related to risk assessment. It's much more like the example I use of getting in the car, and accepting the risk of getting in a car, than it is about confronting a tank.
Message 22282166
Just so the original point isn't lost in the general melee. I'm not really interested in a melee, myself.
"Whether it's my family, or yours, or someone else's, a free society will always be more dangerous in some ways than a repressive one (but only in some ways- and if you look at the number of our citizens behind bars, you can see that the government can be quite dangerous indeed)- and quite frankly I welcome the danger if it means we keep the freedom not to be spied on, and not to be followed by the government, even though we have done nothing to warrant such scrutiny." |
