Freedom and Security

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by Wry Catcher, Jan 20, 2013.

?

Are Freedom and Security mutually exclusive?

  1. Yes

    3 vote(s)
    30.0%
  2. No

    3 vote(s)
    30.0%
  3. Huh.

    1 vote(s)
    10.0%
  4. They must be balanced

    3 vote(s)
    30.0%
  1. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,776
    Thanks Received:
    4,245
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,167
    Are they a dichotomy?
     
  2. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,776
    Thanks Received:
    4,245
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,167
    Lots of looks which is good but let me put the question in terms of a current event.

    Would we as a people but more free and more secure if everyone had the right to carry any type of firearm?

    Would you feel free to go to a mall if you knew each of the thousands of people there were armed? Would you feel more or less secure?
     
  3. drifter
    Offline

    drifter Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2013
    Messages:
    16,686
    Thanks Received:
    7,272
    Trophy Points:
    390
    Ratings:
    +14,033
    I am not a gun owner and to be honest about it I am not bothered if a private citizen owns a gun.

    I am not sure why anyone needs big assault weapons, is there a reason for needing that?
     
  4. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,776
    Thanks Received:
    4,245
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,167
    As a retired member of the LE community I would like laws to outlaw the civilian population from having greater fire power then the officers/deputies/agents on the streets. LE spends time and money recruiting and checking the background of candidates, training them and supervising them closely during their first years on the job, and making sure they understand the law and use of force policies issued by their agency.

    Civilians get a cursory background check and very little training, no psychological examination nor are they supervised even one day after their purchase of a gun.

    I don't care what they keep in their homes, but it would be nice to know what we faced before knocking on their door. As it stands now a LE officer must assume danger and be prepared for everything.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2013
  5. drifter
    Offline

    drifter Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2013
    Messages:
    16,686
    Thanks Received:
    7,272
    Trophy Points:
    390
    Ratings:
    +14,033
    What if civilians who wanted a handgun went through the same training and background check, would you be in support?
     
  6. there4eyeM
    Offline

    there4eyeM unlicensed metaphysician

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    8,088
    Thanks Received:
    821
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,301
    So, this is not a philosophical question about freedom and security, but (again) about firearms?

    Well, OK, here goes an attempt at both at the same time:

    That freedom has to be protected is already arguable. Liberty, the right to movement and speech, can be constrained by others. If one is truly free, however, no other can take that away. For free means freedom from the constraints of error, falseness, an entrapped mind. Obviously, firearms are unneeded to protect such a state.

    By contrast, the 'freedom' to carry firearms can easily lead to insecurity for the one carrying as well as those in the area. Having a firearm does not assure being the one to use it. And at precisely what point and in what kind of confrontation would one produce the arm? How does one decide? There are very few incidents when issues are so clear that a firearm would settle matters. Then, what happens when others also have weapons and, upon seeing a person pull out a lethal device, react in their perceived self defense?

    That kind of freedom and security do not necessarily go together.
     
  7. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,262
    Thanks Received:
    14,919
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +37,061
    Unarmed people are neither free nor secure
     
  8. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,776
    Thanks Received:
    4,245
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,167
    I don't think that's feasible.
     
  9. drifter
    Offline

    drifter Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2013
    Messages:
    16,686
    Thanks Received:
    7,272
    Trophy Points:
    390
    Ratings:
    +14,033
    From a philosophical standpoint if they received the same training and passed the same criteria would you be ok with citizens owning guns?
     
  10. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,776
    Thanks Received:
    4,245
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,167
    LE background is extensive; each candidate is given a complete psychological evaluation, both written and oral - two interviews with a psychologist; at least two interviews with in-house staff, the first with first level supervisors, the second with management and then assigned a training officer who evaluates the candidate regularly for at least one year.

    And that's only part of it.
     

Share This Page