A threat to freedom?

[smo1704]

One thing I've heard that I think is absolutely ridiculous is the assertion that terrorists are a threat to your freedoms. What, exactly, can terrorists do to take away the rights/freedoms of those in the U.S? True, they can kill people, but more people die of asthma attacks (approx 5,000) annually than died in the 9-11 attacks (3,030), and there are over three times as many annual homicides in the U.S., and approximately 13 times as many annual traffic related deaths. This is not to say that it was not a tragedy, or that the U.S. should not take steps to prevent its recurrence, but I think people need to put things in perspective. Terrorists can kill, but there are more dangerous things out there (like pollen), and terrorists, for all their ability to kill, can do nothing to deprive U.S. citizens of their freedoms. The only ones who can take away your freedoms are those who are willing to trade their freedoms for safety, and those who are unwilling to question/protest the actions of the government. The people who run the government are not all knowing, they are not beyond question, and they do not always have your best interests in mind. They are, however, a segment of the population that desires power (as evidenced by what they will say or do to get elected). Entrusting them with your freedoms is like leaving sheep under the protection of wolves.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin

[Rascal]

just a quick thought. i think terrorism definately can deprive you of freedom. it is done through fear more than through action (in north america at least). if you are scared that terrorists might strike at say, a football game, you won't feel safe going to that game and thus won't go. no terrorism, no fear, you go to the game. they are impeding your freedom to do what you want. they don't neccessarily have to do anything, but the fear that terrorism breeds is what impinges on your freedom to do what you like. other freedoms (and what they may be), i'm not to sure about.

[Ancient_Hawk]

just a quick thought. i think terrorism definately can deprive you of freedom. it is done through fear more than through action (in north america at least).

How true.. Terrorism is done through Fear right now by our own government. Just look at the "Homeland Security Terrorism-o-meter" Beautifully color coded to let us know just how much danger we are in!!

OH MY GOD TERROR ALERT ELEVATED RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!

[smo1704]

How true.. Terrorism is done through Fear right now by our own government. Just look at the "Homeland Security Terrorism-o-meter" Beautifully color coded to let us know just how much danger we are in!!

OH MY GOD TERROR ALERT ELEVATED RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!

It's an age old tactic. Here's a quote from one of Hitler's advisors:

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

[GoingNova]

All well and good, but on a beautiful September morning, 19 animals flew commercial airlines into buildings, killing thousands of people. A group of these same animals took over a school in Russia and did what any sane, rational, or civilized human would never, in a million years, ever consider doing: they gunned down fleeing children. My brother is an NYPD Intelligence Detective, believe me when I tell you, the government is doing anything BUT scare you! If they are doing anything wrong, it is not telling you enough! The bottom line is, you ARE NOT safe anywhere these days. The Patriot Act is not this evil thing some in the media would have you believe. It is a tool that is allowing law enforcement to go after people who would cut your head off and shoot your family if given the opportunity. That is not something the government is concocking to scare you, it is a cold, hard fact. The average person has absolutely nothing at all to fear over the Patriot Act. Do you hear anyone complaining about RICO Statures?

[MrsD]

I wouldn't say that terrorism has taken away my freedoms. It may influence some choices, but I maintain the same freedoms I did prior to 9/11. As far as the Patriot Act is concerned, I gladly submit to it. Our country has been far too lax for far too long. We left the doors open for these pieces of ****, and it's time we did something about it.

[Sicander]

I think terrorism is a threat to freedom definately. Its a threat to life and any unlawful malevolent threat to life is a threat to freedom. Terrorists murder people. They are murderers and muder is a threat to freedom.

[smo1704]

I think terrorism is a threat to freedom definately. Its a threat to life and any unlawful malevolent threat to life is a threat to freedom. Terrorists murder people. They are murderers and muder is a threat to freedom.

That may make them a threat to your safety, but not your freedom. Also, by this logic, even if a terrorist attack on the scale of 9-11 occured every year violent criminals would still be a threefold greater threat to your freedom than terrorists.

[Sicander]

I should be free to be safe and I have to be safe to be free.

[smo1704]

But in that case you never have been free. There have always been threats to your safety significantly more severe than terrorism. They just seem less severe than terrorism because they take one or two lives at a time. I believe this is called the "vivid case error" or something to that effect. It is the same reason that people fear flying in airplanes, although it is actually safer than driving.

[Sicander]

Im talking about clear and present danger here. Not, "Im not free a cars gonna run me over if I run into the highway" Terrorism represents a threat to freedom. Im not saying that terrorism is currently taking our freedom. Just that it could.

[smo1704]

Im talking about clear and present danger here. Not, "Im not free a cars gonna run me over if I run into the highway" Terrorism represents a threat to freedom. Im not saying that terrorism is currently taking our freedom. Just that it could.

First off, this is an excellent example of the vivid case error (It has no special term, it is one type of failure based on the availability heuristic, but to simplify I will call it the vivid case error). Here's the info straight out of the book:

Why do we fear the wrong things? Why do we fear terrorism more than accidents-which kill nearly as many people per week in just the United States as did terrorism with its 2527 worldwide deaths in the 1990's (Johnson, 2001)? Even with the horror of 9/11, more Americans died of food poisoning (which scares few) than of terrorism (which scares many).... Fourth, we fear what is most readily available in memory. Horrific images of United Flight 175 slicing into the World Trade Center form indelible memories. And these serve as our measuring rods as we intuitively judge risks. Thousands of safe car trips (for those who have survived to read this) have extinguished our anxieties about driving.
In less familiar realms, vivid memorable images dominate our fears. A handful of massively publicized anthrax victims in 2001 riveted America's attention in a way that more than 20,000 annual influenza fatalities or 30,000 suicidal, homicidal, and accidental gun deaths never could (Exploring Psychology Sixth Edition, David G. Myers).

Disease, car accidents and terrorism are all threats to your safety. Why is terrorism a threat to your freedom, while the other two are not?

[GoingNova]

Disease, car accidents and terrorism are all threats to your safety. Why is terrorism a threat to your freedom, while the other two are not?

That would be because terrorism is intentional, while diseases and accidents are not. You really can not compare them. There are exceptable reasons for loss of life, terrorism is not one of them. Diseases and accidents are part of the "every day dangers" that we as human beings deal with. My son's school getting taken over by terrorists (GOD FORBID) is nothing at all like my son getting into a car accident or getting some sort of illness (GOD FORBID).

[smo1704]

That would be because terrorism is intentional, while diseases and accidents are not. You really can not compare them. There are exceptable reasons for loss of life, terrorism is not one of them. Diseases and accidents are part of the "every day dangers" that we as human beings deal with. My son's school getting taken over by terrorists (GOD FORBID) is nothing at all like my son getting into a car accident or getting some sort of illness (GOD FORBID).

Many homicides are intentional, and there are still about 5 times as many total homicides per year as died in the 9-11 attacks. If intent were the primary factor these should represent a threat to your freedom too.

[Sicander]

WOOOOOO there dont get me wrong. I dont fear terrorism in the slightest. I stand unfritened in spite of it. If you fear it you let them win! I think it is a threat to freedom but I would never give it the respect of fear.

[smo1704]

I was not referring to fear, so much as the fact that the vivid nature of terrorism makes it seem to be a larger risk than it actually is. I just wanted to present it in the actual context. I also agree that terrorism's only power is fear, and giving into that fear allows the terrorists to win. However, I do not see how terrorists can take your freedoms. They can frighten people into relinquishing their freedoms in exchange for safety, but they cannot take their freedoms away outright (if you believe this is possible please illustrate exactly how this would, or could occur).

[GoingNova]

Many homicides are intentional, and there are still about 5 times as many total homicides per year as died in the 9-11 attacks. If intent were the primary factor these should represent a threat to your freedom too.

Granted, but again, crime is also considered to be one of those things that people tend to associate with just being one of those negative things in life that we "just have to deal with". Also, homocide is usually one on one, and generally not mass killing, like terrorism is.

I guess the best way to say it is, I think people in the United States do not want terrorism to be added to that list of things in life you "just have to deal with".

[GoingNova]

I was not referring to fear, so much as the fact that the vivid nature of terrorism makes is seem to be a larger risk than it actually is.

I agree 100%, but I think terrorism just strikes a chord in people. I think it is just one of those things that just goes so against the normal human train of thought, that is upsets people in a way that goes deeper than the average threats. It angers me to the core, and although I am generally a compassionate guy, I have no compassion for terrorists. If Osama Bin Ladin was ever caught, I think he should be nailed to a tree and left to die, while vultures pick at his body. And those animals in Beslan Russian, may the good Lord have mercy on my soul for my thoughts of what I would do to them! Torture is too good for men who machine gun children.

[smo1704]

I agree 100%, but I think terrorism just strikes a chord in people. I think it is just one of those things that just goes so against the normal human train of thought, that is upsets people in a way that goes deeper than the average threats. It angers me to the core, and although I am generally a compassionate guy, I have no compassion for terrorists. If Osama Bin Ladin was ever caught, I think he should be nailed to a tree and left to die, while vultures pick at his body. And those animals in Beslan Russian, may the good Lord have mercy on my soul for my thoughts of what I would do to them! Torture is too good for men who machine gun children.
I agree that what they did was wrong, but that does not make it a threat to freedom any more than any other crime. However, I must make a point here that I was tempted to make earlier. Labeling terrorists evil really misses the point. The very reason they commit these acts is that they believe that they, and they alone, are good, and that those who believe differently are evil, and their lives have no value. I agree that their actions were evil, and that if/when captured they should be punished, but I do not believe we should stoop to their level in inflicting that punishment. Using cruel methods of punishment would increase sympathy for the terrorist cause, and killing them would make them martyrs (we'd generate thousands of new recruits for the terror networks).

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg

[GoingNova]

Using cruel methods of punishment would increase sympathy for the terrorist cause, and killing them would make them martyrs (we'd generate thousands of new recruits for the terror networks).

You are of course, correct, but I never said it was the RIGHT thing to do. I should have been more specific: I should have said "I wish we could". ;) I do think we should be heavy handed though. There is no room for terrorism in a civilized society, and it should not be tolerated at all, at any level.

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg

Sounds like someone who hates religion to me. I think that religion is responsible for far more good than evil. People always over look all the good it does, and tend to focus on the bad. Human nature I guess.

[Klashbash]

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg


I’m just jumping in here even though it’s slightly off topic. I’m an Atheist and I find this quote to be completely found on the foundation of ignorance and hatred. According to Weinberg, it’s impossible for good people to do evil things if their not religious. If you want anti-religious quotes that are rational you may want to heed the founding fathers.


"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
~Thomas Jefferson

"I believe it is an established maxim in morals that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him." ~Abraham Lincoln

[Sicander]

Blindfolded fear?
We must have differing definitions of fear. I see fear and respect as synonymous. I only fear things greater than myself. But it is not a blinding fear. You are confuesing fright with fear. I am not cowering in fear of God, I just respect his power. The whole fearing God thing was a slight mistranslation. In old hebrew they have different words for fear. One meaning fear out of respect and one meaning fear out of terror and confusion. To often people misenterprate the word fear in the bible.

[smo1704]

I disagree with Steve Weinberg's quote in most circumstances. For one, very few people are truly evil, in the sense that they live life in an attempt to inflict the most harm they possibly can upon others for no other reason than to cause misery. Most evil actions are done in an attempt to "do the right thing," or to do what is best for oneself, regardless of the cost to others. For instance, the Unabomber thought that technology was evil, and that he was improving the world by attempting to destroy it. The problem in this case is religious absolutism (in the ethical sense) combined with extremism. It really does not matter what you believe so long as you assume that those who believe otherwise are evil, and must therefore be destroyed.

The quote I really wanted to use here I can't find, (at least not anymore) and I am not willing to trust my memory. Unfortunately, I partially disagree with that quote as well, and even if I found it, it would have required explanation in order to make sense in this case. Given the choice between using a quote that was readily at hand and made some sense without explanation as opposed to one that I could not find that would require an explanation, I chose the easy way out. Why I didn't think to not use a quote at all is beyond me (at 3:20 in the morning it seemed absolutely essential).

[Klashbash]

Responding to Sicander…


Blindfolded fear?
We must have differing definitions of fear. I see fear and respect as synonymous. I only fear things greater than myself. But it is not a blinding fear. You are confuesing fright with fear. I am not cowering in fear of God, I just respect his power. The whole fearing God thing was a slight mistranslation. In old hebrew they have different words for fear. One meaning fear out of respect and one meaning fear out of terror and confusion. To often people misenterprate the word fear in the bible.


Hell is divine blackmail and if it weren’t for it there probably wouldn’t be much if any Christians at all. It is used as a fear tactic to get people to believe in this supposed god. One does not use reason and logic to come up with the conclusion that god exists and it is therefore blind.

[Sicander]

I did use reason and logic to make my comclutions about God so I guess in your world Im the exeption. Just becasue you dont think its reasonable or logical does not mean that it isnt.

[Klashbash]

Man I forgot to reply to this :X.

Responding to Sicander…


I did use reason and logic to make my comclutions about God so I guess in your world Im the exeption. Just becasue you dont think its reasonable or logical does not mean that it isnt.



You did did you? Alright, why don’t you tell us all what reason and logic made you come to the conclusion that god is real? And just because you think you came to the conclusion of god through logic and reason doesn’t mean you did.