Choosing between Big Brother and the Bill of Rights. Where do you stand?

Always the bill of rights. Living in a free society comes with risks.

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

I think that we allowed fear to dictate what we would accept as "Security" and as most bureaucrats do, they expanded their programs because knowledge is power and power is control.

It's ridiculous to record every conversation/text , it felt like the KGB had run these programs.

Time to move on.

I choos Bill

I would far rather have Liberty over Security. I think the government is getting far too intrusive into people's lives without the protection of the Fourth Amendment.

Any chance we can get to rein the Power we have vested in the government back in, we should.

It is far better for the government to be impotent, as us to have our Rights preserved than the other way around.

Big Brother or the Bill of Rights? Is that the choice? Sadly, I think that the debate has gone off the tracks whenever someone argues that it is a choice of liberty vs safety. To be honest, I believe that safety, true safety, lies only in liberty. When we surrender liberty for some hollow promise of safety, we end up with neither.

Sadly President Bush missed an opportunity following the attacks of 9/11. Basically, he told Americans to sit back and allow the government to secure the nation. I would have much preferred it had he sounded the call to all Americans to take up the cause of defending ourselves. He could have reinvigorated Civil Defense providing organization and training for citizens to respond to all disasters, natural and man made. How many times must we be treated to images of citizens sitting on their roofs or cowering in shelters waiting for the government to come save them?

Think about it. Many major cities suffered cataclysmic disasters in the past: San Francisco, Chicago, Seattle, Galveston, New York, etc. In every case the citizens rebuilt their homes with little help from the federal government.

Think about it. If terrorists come marching down main street, our government has already failed. Who would think it reasonable to sit around waiting for them to come save us?

Think about it. What would be the purpose of martial law in response to a terrorist attack? Again, such attacks are prima facie evidence that government has failed.

I would prefer that President Bush had lent government resources to organize, train, and equip local militia so that citizens could better defend themselves. No individual, no matter how well armed, can withstand an organized assault on their own.

Well, Bush is no longer President. He had his chance and he employed a different strategy. Now we have an Administration hell bent on denying us the opportunity to prepare and defend ourselves even if we are of a mind to.

President Obama complains that he was left a mess by his predecessor. Imagine the mess his successor will find when they take office. It makes one wonder why so many are clamoring for the job...

Too easy, especially when you call it what it is. We have a burgeoning Surveillance State/Police State, and most Americans don't even realize it. I choose Freedom.

I say the Bill of Rights. While I also recognize the need for security and surveillance of our enemies I don't think that can be done to all of us in the name of security. They need to refine the act to focus on the actual threat and not toss out a blanket that allows them to collect everything, just in case. This is the sort of sweeping government power the founders were concerned about even though the technology was not envisioned.

Can you imagine the founders approving the US Government going into peoples homes and taking information (papers and effects) to see if you were doing anything wrong? I don't think so. Get a warrant backed up with probable cause, signed by a judge. If there is a serious national security element their is a process for that too.

I say gut it and put it back to the bill of rights and then re-work the entire fraudulent and manipulated system of law that has sprouted since the early 20th century. My oath was to support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies foreign and domestic. It wasn't a punch line. It doesn't matter if it's a terrorist or POTUS because we are bound to this oath which is beyond them. Patriot act, and executive orders are atrocities that while they can help, they ultimately undermine the constitution.