The debate surrounding civil liberties and national security was not
widely debated around the country immediately following the attacks on
September 11th. An example of this is shown by the lack of debate and
dissent in the beginning surrounding the U.S.A. Patriot Act that was
enacted just six weeks after September 11th, which made many changes to
the way the government could monitor citizens[1].
Some of these included widening of wire tap authority, and detainment of
suspects for an indefinite amount of time[2].
When evaluating the balance between civil liberties and national
security, it is important to remember that putting freedoms on hold for
an indefinite amount of time in a crisis, may jeopardize the ability to
possess them in the future. As Richard C. Leone, president of the
Century Foundation[3]
and faculty of Princeton University states, “The struggle against
terrorism could continue for generations, and we run the risk of finding
ourselves on a slippery slope, making decisions in which freedoms that
are set aside for the emergency become permanently lost to us. In the
end, the freedoms we abridge in the interest of security will be largely the result of choices that we, not the terrorists make”[4]. To live in fear, as Leone implies is letting the terrorists win their war. However, there are arguments against this view. A common argument for the national security measures such as the Patriot Act, are that it is a necessity to give up rights in order to have security. Mona Charen, a journalist writes, “We should relinquish some liberty in exchange for security”[5]. She explains that she would rather err on the side of caution and be wrong than to ignore something that could be potentially dangerous. This sentiment along with the common phrase “ If I am not doing anything wrong than I have nothing to hide”, miss the point concerning the debate. The point is not whether people have something to hide; the point is that the government should not be able to relinquish freedom whenever it is most convenient for them. Giving up rights is a very serious issue and our nation should always watch the precedents we set. National security has been a major concern after the terrorist attacks in 2001. Leone mentions some of the ways the nation is dealing with the attacks. He states “reorganizing major portions of the government, launching a new military build-up, taking direct action in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen and elsewhere, imposing countless additional security measures, seeking better intelligence, hardening possible targets…and introducing significant changes in the rules governing the justice system, press access and civil liberties”[6]. Two examples of this are the U.S.A. Patriot Act and the practice of racial profiling that are explored more in depth in the next sections. |