Civil liberties

The Register is reporting a recent study showing that the British people seem to be getting blasé about their civil liberties, in the face of government propaganda about terrorism and the recent bombings in London.

Three out of four Brits would happily hand over their civil liberties in exchange for better security against terrorist attacks, according figures from pollsters ICM. It is interesting to note that this is the same general public that rails against any attempts to make them drive more slowly, or with more care. This is in spite of the fact that in 2004, 671 pedestrians were killed in traffic accidents, and a further 2,550 people died in other road accidents…
Further, 62 per cent of respondents were in favour of deporting foreign radical Islamists, even if that deportation was to a country that used torture. Only 19 per cent directly opposed this idea.

It’s rather scary that the public are becoming so scared (or indoctrinated) that they’re willing to give up – for good – customary freedoms for a spurious sense of security. Thousands might die in road-traffic accidents each year but no-one countenances any restrictions on their “right” to drive as fast as they want; however, let a hundred people die in a bombing and suddenly people are keen to relinquish far more important rights if they can only feel a little safer. The really sad thing, though, is that these proposed “security” measures would do almost nothing to stop terrorism, or organised crime. They would make it easier for the Government to keep track of ordinary people, but wouldn’t stop those who seriously try to get around the regulations.

Worst of all, people are now eager to deport “radicals”, even if they would face torture or death if they were deported. Have we really come to the point where we would send someone to pain or death simply because we don’t like their words? And lest anyone say “this means terrorists”, it cannot be that. Our laws already have plenty of ways to deal with convicted terrorists! We are talking here about people who espouse a different view of the world. We might disagree with them. We might even find them distasteful. But is this any reason to send them into harm’s way? I believe firmly that people welcomed into this country have a duty to act responsibly towards us and not encourage those who would harm us; if someone persists in doing so, there must be consequences (deportation to a safe country, for example). Just not torture or death.

pax et bonum

Article posted at 10:39am on 23 August 2005
Category: Politics, Struggling, General