Public Liberty vs. Public Safety

In marked contrast to the Founders’ thoughts on a snoopy government meddling in the Peoples’ lives and “eating out of their substance,” our President has another opinion on the necessity of spying on the American public.  In a widely reported statement he stated:

“'I think it’s important to understand that you can’t have 100 percent security and then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience,' Obama said.  'We’re going to have to make some choices as a society.' Quote from the Daily Mail Online (UK) Read more: http://tinyurl.com/lu5pjws

In my opinion if he had said, "you cannot have 100% security, therefore be prepared to defend yourselves, your families and your republic,” then I would have been much more in agreement with his statement.  The nanny state concept would have us believe that without the nanny state the generally dumb public could never survive.



The real truth is man has survived for thousands of years without NSA and without all the other alphabet soup agencies.  Our Founders’ thoughts, based on their writings, generally follow that of Benjamin Franklin when he stated, “Any society that would give up a little Liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”


The People of Pike County have cast their vote to elect me to the County Board, whether their choice is good or not only time will tell.  I find myself on the Public Safety committee.  This committee is charged with a number of important tasks, which I take very seriously.  The interesting thing about laws, rules and regulations which are purportedly designed to increase public safety tend to decrease public liberty.


I have read little of concern in the Founders’ writings about public safety, while on the other hand I read much about concern for the Public Liberty.  It occurs to me that perhaps it is time to have a committee called the Public Liberty committee which is charged with preserving Liberty for all.  We have so much concern for public safety that a small ice cream stand cannot put out a picnic table for patrons to sit at and eat a little ice cream without building his and hers public restrooms that are handicap accessible.  “But it’s the law and you MUST comply!” is the cry of the tyrant.  “You must paint the bare plywood shelf or be shut down,” said to a volunteer not for profit group serving one small town’s youth.  You cannot drive and talk at the same time.  Next thing you will not be able to drink coffee or a Pepsi while driving.  You cannot drink a big gulp in another location.  Where does it end?  How ‘bout you shall not drive and think at the same time!” 


Another example:  tell me how disarming the general public increases the public safety.   Somebody help me understand how continuing the FOID card preserves public safety when any out-of-state felon can come and plop their out of state ID on the counter and buy ammo when a local person cannot.  No, I really don’t fear for public safety as much as I fear for the lost Liberty that seems always to be on the chopping block.  I think the Founders would be disappointed.