Slashdot Mirror
Some Rights May Have To Be 'Eroded' For Safety
Turn-X Alphonse writes "The BBC is reporting on a speech given by the head of MI5 in the UK. Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller claims in the future some civil rights may have to 'erode', in order to keep everyone in the country safe from terrorism." From the article: "MI5 has recently let it be known that it is in favour of making telephone intercept evidence admissible in court. Previously the intelligence and security services had expressed concern such that evidence might reveal operational details. Meanwhile, Home Secretary Charles Clarke has been calling for EU states to keep mobile phone and e-mail records for longer, to help fight terrorism and crime."
people who constantly bitch about politicians but never vote
Voting is accepting the nanny state. Forcing 49% of people who disagree with you to accept your views as law is anti-civil liberty.
If we had more personal responsbility in this world governments wouldn't be able to get away with attitudes like this.
Right. This is why financial liberty is far more important than civil liberty. Cut off authorian access to your pocketbook and they'll be unable to affect your civil rights.
Except when they come and take your pocketbook with guns. Like these guys.
Evil people don't think they're evil. - George Lucas, Making of Ep III
It may be very hard to stop someone who wants to blow up a train and is convinced it is the will of their God to do so. Security should be increased and anything in the power of public utilities like train stations and airports should be done to prevent terrorism.
Absolutely, and it does nothing about the real killer, governmental incompetance. To fix that we need MORE civil rights. And after that's done, the terrorism problem should dry up on its own.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
The BBC has a Have Your Say section where people can talk about news stories. This is a comment on this one:
"Western countries' obsession with individual rights has often been seen as a strength, but in the modern world it has become a weakness. When these rights were developed over the preceding centuries it was never envisaged that they would be exploited to shield those who wish to annihilate those very rights and the society that gave them birth. We should wake up and curtail some of the more excessive freedoms, in order to preserve those that are more fundamental."
What a complete idiot.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
A couple of destroyed buildings serves as a very visible symbol.
If terrorists had killed 4000 random people with a selective virus, sure it would still be nasty but there wouldn't be any video to watch or a great big hole in the ground afterwards.
Gun deaths are the same thing: not visible, so ignored.
For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
It is wonderful how US citizens love the "Freedom" logo which is sewn invisibly onto every flag. They love it and their country - which is a cool thing. I wish Britons were more patriotic. But the funny thing is - as a European I feel that some freedoms seem noticably absent in the US. Real rights - which I enjoy. For example... The freedom to buy alcohol - as an adult. Denied until the age of 21. Never been "carded" in England. The freedom to have sexual intercourse. (Both heterosexual and homosexual) - the age of consent is 16 in the UK. The freedom to consume soft drugs. The freedom to decline mass immunization programs. And not to mention the fact that most European states no longer execute criminals (especially retartded or child criminals) - It is not just the government - walk into Tesco- the UKs largest retailler and take some photograps - no problem Walk into Walmart with a camera and you will be escorted off the premises. I guess freedom comes in different flavours. Carni
The Libertarian party believes that the only justified function of government is the protection of the lives, rights and property of its citizens. Thus, your strategy might not work too well as the local police would come and remove you, the local judiciary would try and convict you of trespass and/or assault and/or theft, and the punishment would probably be a bit unpleasant. Of course, the home's owner might have saved the government a lot of trouble by dispatching you him/herself.
This is not to say that Libertarians don't support privatization of some law enforcement (i.e., I may contract my law enforcement needs to a private firm if I want a higher quality service - such as a full-time body guard).
This is of course the Libertarian view -- in my experience it's hard to determine what the libertarian view is as they range from anarchists to those who don't seem all that unlike some of the creeps we routinely elect under the Republican or Democrat banner.
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading