London Banter - View Single Post

Ian Johnston · July 23rd 05, 07:07 AM posted to uk.transport.london,uk.railway

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:37:51 UTC, (Neil
Williams) wrote:

: On 22 Jul 2005 12:06:03 GMT, "Ian Johnston"
: wrote:
:
: : 2. He who gives up liberty to gain security deserves neither liberty
: : nor security[2].
:
: I've never believed that. Does it mean that, because I have to use a
: PIN to get money from a hole in the wall, I deserve to have my account
: cleaned out?
:
: No, of course it doesn't. How does using a PIN infringe on your civil
: liberties?

Takes time, means I have to remember something. But if you want
another example,
do I deserve niether liberty nor security because I lock my front door
when I go out?

: It isn't an absolute statement, anyway. The point is that I would
: prefer to live in a society where unpleasant things happen
: occasionally, and where if/when caught the perpetrators of said
: unpleasant things are punished suitably[1], than in a police state.

Agreed completely. It's just the absolutist nature of the statement
that turns me off - and the fact that it's often touted by American
right wingers (I think it's a Franklin quote originally) to justify
their bizarre idea of a proper society. "Giving up liberty" to them
normally means "not carrying guns" ...

: (Similarly, I applaud the 15-year-old who overturned a curfew order
: recently....)

Yes. Well done that kid.

Ian