The Instigator
StephanosPrimus
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
mikethedebater
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Should we be willing to give up a little privacy for a little national security from terrorism?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/28/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 471 times Debate No: 74419
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

StephanosPrimus

Con

Ben Franklin is credited with having said: "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." My Canadian government is about to pass a law that, via the vaguest wording I've ever read anywhere, will allow myriad assaults on our Charter of Rights and Freedoms... all under the guise of ensuring Canadians can be protected from the threat of terrorism. In the last 47 years there have been less than 400 deaths in Canada due to terrorism. Do I need to trot out the stats of deaths *per year* from disease, car accidents, et cetera? In my mind, Bill C-51 (popularly described as the "Secret Police Bill") is just a power grab... and a huge step toward Fascism.
mikethedebater

Pro

My opening remarks will be short and sweet. Ill wait for the next round to beef it up.

While civil liberties and freedom are incredibly important to a nation, when the security of that nation is compromised, any and all measures must be used to ensure the safety of the people. I personally believe that the government should be allowed to take extra measures to increase national security and heres why.

1. After 9/11, as a result of the patriot act, it was discovered that there were several more terrorist attacks planned on other parts of the country (Time square, Chicago tower etc.) had it not been for the patriot act, these plots would never have been uncovered and thousands more people would have fallen victim to terrorists and we would likely have a "9/11" every few months.

2. I would much rather be safe from terrorism and have a little bit of a tight leash then say I was living in "Democracy" while planes flew into all the countries major buildings.

3. A real world example of what happens when you take away the power from the government is in Iraq and Libya, they had strong leaders who kept terrorism in check and Islamic Terrorism was practically unheard of. After the U.S. brought "Democracy" to the nations, they were immediately plauged by a resurgence of terrorists and all the citizens of those countries are crying for their government back. They were "free" but unhappy

thats my two cents
Debate Round No. 1
StephanosPrimus

Con

How many terrorist plots were uncovered before the Patriot Act? Contrast that with what's been uncovered since and you'll know the *actual* need for it.

What is to stop your proposed "any and all measures" from producing a fascist state? After all, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Once our privacy is given away it is nearly impossible to regain it outside of mounting a revolution.

How many people were killed in the 9/11 attacks? Now, how many people have been wrongly killed by police in the last ten years, or by drug related offenses, or impaired driving, et cetera? Should the government be invading our privacy in an attempt to nip all those in the bud using the same rationale? Are you suggesting that the threat of terrorism is more urgent and meaningful than the reality of thousands and thousands of other wrongful deaths?

Terrorism is practically unheard of here in North America too. If you think about it, we've heard very little on the subject before 9/11 or since. What's been shouted from the rooftops, however (perhaps with the purpose of allowing the government to lurk in every corner of our lives) is the *threat* of terrorism. How many North Americans died in the two World Wars just to protect our freedom? Why should we hand that freedom away (the greatest element of which is privacy) because we're scared of the loudmouths and bullies of the world?
mikethedebater

Pro

mikethedebater forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
StephanosPrimus

Con

I guess there's not much of a debate if the opposing side loses interest. Pity.
mikethedebater

Pro

mikethedebater forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
StephanosPrimus

Con

This is my first visit, and my first debate on this site. Either the topic is not interesting enough, or I've scared my opponent into submission, or he doesn't find my response worth debating... the latter of which I refuse to accept. So far I'm disappointed. I went out of my way to look for a site that would stimulate me intellectually. Boo! Hiss! : )
mikethedebater

Pro

mikethedebater forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
StephanosPrimus

Con

StephanosPrimus forfeited this round.
mikethedebater

Pro

mikethedebater forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by StephanosPrimus 2 years ago
StephanosPrimus
Thanks. Let's hope someone takes the (de)bait. :)
Posted by StoicNation 2 years ago
StoicNation
Wonderful saying;
This will be an interesting philosophical debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.