Skip to main content

View Diary: Bamford: Holmes Would Have Been Under Surveillance Before Killings If He “Had A Muslim Name" (83 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I Guess I need (0+ / 0-)

    to construct a diary with the following poll:

    Are you in favor of saving lives in the U.S.?



    "Ironic" that the bush admin and others told us after 9/11 that "sacrfices regarding our liberty were going to have to be made in order to surveil "terrorists"-- those being of the Islamic extremist type-- as correctly pointed out by Mr Bamford and others-- but not related to rampage killers/domestic terror?


    "A civilization which does not provide young people with a way to earn a living is pretty poor". Eleanor Roosevelt

    by Superpole on Sun Aug 05, 2012 at 08:09:27 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Those who (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Nada Lemming, Superpole

      sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

      A pertinent Ben Franklin quote. Though it's okay with me - and fully within the boundaries of personal choices on what liberties they're willing to sacrifice to their fears - for people to choose to avoid places and situations where some nut job might go off. What is NOT within the boundaries of personal choice is the blanket abrogation of my liberties just so the fearful can feel safer.

      "Saving lives" is a grotesquely overused self-justification for all kinds of nefarious policies in a world where the 100% certain result of being alive is to end up dead. There are quite a lot of people in this country who value their liberties and do not live in fear. Everything we do (or don't do) in our mundane lives carries an element of risk.

      A clear example of how the "saving lives" excuse can be entirely spurious can be found in the health care debates. We are told that more than 40,000 Americans die every year from not having access to timely medical care - something the ACA (which I support) is intended to address. For the oft-cited 'purpose' of saving lives.

      What inevitably goes unsaid in the statistical justifications is that ~200,000 Americans die every year of medical errors in hospitals. Not including people who die outside of hospitals from the same lousy medical care - figure three or four times as many, at least. You'd have to quantify those stats a bit farther to come up with an accurate read on how many lives actually might be saved (if any) versus the number of lives lost to shamefully lousy medical care, and that is never done. Because the statistics might indicate that people are generally better off without.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site