Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta

What do you value more; your rights to privacy and freedom of speech or safety? watch

  • View Poll Results: Right to privacy or guarenteed safety?
    Privacy
    13
    81.25%
    Safety
    3
    18.75%

    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Hypothetical question here..

    Say you had the choice between guarenteed safety i.e. no bombings, no mass shootings. You can walk around in the full knowledge that nothing like that will happen but the price is the big brother state every phone call monitered, every email etc., so for lack of a better term there is now a thought police similar to minority report [if anyone has ever seen that?

    Your other choice is the american dream of tiny government your privacy is agiven no phone taps, no data trawling and so on. So anyone with a grudge could quite happily let off a bomb somewhere if they so chose due to peoples right to privacy from the government.

    which one?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Why can't there be something in between? You have chosen two extremes.

    In your hypothetical scenario, I'd probably opt for safety but in reality safety can't be guaranteed so I'd go with privacy.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    safety. privacy doesn't mean much when you're dead
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Safety. I'm not doing anything illegal or have anything illegal on me so I don't care.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Privacy and Freedom of Speech - because safety doesn't mean much when your life is arbitrarily made the business of someone else.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Napp)
    Hypothetical question here..

    Say you had the choice between guarenteed safety i.e. no bombings, no mass shootings. You can walk around in the full knowledge that nothing like that will happen but the price is the big brother state every phone call monitered, every email etc., so for lack of a better term there is now a thought police similar to minority report [if anyone has ever seen that?

    Your other choice is the american dream of tiny government your privacy is agiven no phone taps, no data trawling and so on. So anyone with a grudge could quite happily let off a bomb somewhere if they so chose due to peoples right to privacy from the government.

    which one?
    Safety, but I take issue with this hypothetical question because a lot of people genuinely seem to believe that privacy and safety are mutually exclusive when they're absolutely not.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmileyVibe)
    Safety. I'm not doing anything illegal or have anything illegal on me so I don't care.
    Maybe not at the moment. But suppose one day in your "safe" utopia the ruling government decides to outlaw a particular political ideology and imprison anybody found to be holding those views. Suppose you just happen to support that political ideology, perhaps you have made posts online in the past expressing those views. Well now you're in deep trouble because remember, the government monitors all internet communications, they know everything about you, they know you hold these "illegal" political views and they'll have no trouble finding you and imprisoning you.

    An extreme example yes, but it's happened countless times throughout history in places that have allowed their governments to hold unlimited power under the promise of safety and security. Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Maoist China, North Korea etc, and the governments of those nations ended up collectively murdering hundreds of millions of their own people, all of whom at one point probably thought they were doing nothing illegal too.

    Yes liberty opens you up to the risk that occasionally a crazy person with a bomb or gun might kill a few dozen people. But as history has demonstrated numerous times, the absolute safety side of the spectrum opens you up to the risk of all powerful, corrupt and tyrannical government, which paradoxically is a far greater threat to your personal security in the long run than an occasional nutter with a bomb.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Safety
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    The difficulty is that restricting free speech and invading privacy and is, in and of itself, an act of violence, as I should be able to freely express myself without fear of reprisal. Conversely, although I think it's better to err on the side of not restricting the freedom of citizens, we still need to draw some lines - while it may be perfectly legal for me to express myself by yelling 'FIRE' and setting off smoke alarms in the privacy of my own home, it would be a quite different matter if I were allowed to do that in a hospital, where those actions could cause serious harm to others.

    ...I vote we grant every freedom possible to people, except where it is demonstrable that the benefits of imposing restriction X outweigh it's harms. I am generally fine with having my free speech restricted and privacy invaded, just so long as you can demonstrate the ends justify the means.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Depends on the system. If the system is a perfect democracy, then safety. I would love to have a big brother-esque state that is democratically elected.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    Safety, but I take issue with this hypothetical question because a lot of people genuinely seem to believe that privacy and safety are mutually exclusive when they're absolutely not.
    I also take issue with this question but*I would answer it with privacy. I would prefer a short life with some kind of freedom than a long one spent constantly in fear of saying the wrong thing, talking to the wrong people or going to the wrong place.
    I also don't believe the government/army/police/whoever would be able to guarantee our safety 100%, as people are good at finding loopholes, so the trade off seems a bit pointless to me.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Wōden)
    Maybe not at the moment. But suppose one day in your "safe" utopia the ruling government decides to outlaw a particular political ideology and imprison anybody found to be holding those views.
    Or more simply and less paranoidly, privacy is a human need. We have curtains on our houses and doors on our bathrooms not because we're secretly building bombs but because we have a need for privacy.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    "Those who sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither" Benjamin Franklin
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Personally I'd never choose to sacrifice my privacy or freedom of speech to any degree for a cause as silly as "guaranteed safety".

    Though if we did live in such a system, then surely other countries will fully respect our newly chosen way of life and never consider going to war with us, as that would threaten our perfect society. Oh wait, they wouldn't give a crap? Then the safety is not guaranteed and never will be. And even if it was, I still choose my privacy.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Privacy. I'd rather risk maybe dying in a terrorist attack than live in an Orwellian world where he government monitors everything I do. No thank you.

    Regardless, people are still capable of mass shootings and bombings, even if their phone and email are tapped. They'd just be more careful about communicating, assuming they aren't working alone, anyway.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I would much prefer to live in an unsafe society where I am completely free instead of a controlled society which is safe. I would never stop fighting to be free!
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Privacy.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    The problem is that this depends on what the big brother state would want to you to do.

    If the big brother state is a Muslim overload that wants eveeryone to be perfect little Muslims, obviously, I'll take privacy.

    If they are an endlessly omnipotent and rational God like thing, then that's different, I will take safety.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    If I could choose between living in either of those existing societies, I'd choose safety, because I really don't have much to hide and wouldn't really care. But if I'd have to choose between either of those societies existing because I've chosen it I'd take the privacy, because I believe that that sort of systematic control just isn't fair and shouldn't be imposed on people.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    In principle, safety would be a better priority. In practice, those who sacrifice liberty for security have and deserve neither. It's a bit of a false dichotomy in your poll so any data extracted out of it won't be meaningful in any sense of the term
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.