Many look at
our nation’s recent trend in security and surveillance measures and are quick
to label them Orwellian. Although our practices do support the saying “better
safe than sorry”, it’s important to remember that many countries -even our own
NATO allies, the British -have already taken much stricter measures.
I think that
we, America, are so conflicted with our government’s authoritarian practices
because we haven’t quite decided which “freedom” we value more: freedom from harm, or our own civil rights. We esteem ourselves on bringing democracy and peace to lands
far and far away, but we forget that the peace we enjoy on our own soil is a
blessing considering how much we impose ourselves on other countries. The world
is tired of us -I’ve lived it and I’ve openly defended our practices while
living abroad. We have the political, military and economic power to go where
we choose, and we do so frequently. Obviously educated and reasonable
individuals are respectful and tolerant of us, but the masses do not
necessarily appreciate our policies. Our actions will inevitably spark
emotional and responses among extremists, and until we discontinue our
campaigns abroad (which I think is neither possible nor wise at the moment) we
can cope with a few inconveniences at home. After all; if considering invasions
of privacy, law-abiding citizens should have nothing to worry about. I can deal
with knowing my government can access my e-mail if it means I get to walk to
school without fear of death -which is more than can be said for the world
beyond our borders.
Regarding a police officer’s right to perform a blood test on a D.U.I. suspect, perhaps we shouldn’t be paying so much attention to how to police drunk drivers, but rather figure out why we have one of the highest automobile related death rates in the world. Coming down hard on drunk drivers does help to deter future incidents, but preventative measures would probably be more effective.