I must give a major hat tip to Van Buren for that comment in my diary about the 4th Amendment earlier in the week. Frankly, it is (to me) one of the best analogies I have heard with respect to talking about the power grab and erosion of rights the past six years in the name of “security”.
How many times have we heard the entirely irrelevant, factually incorrect and short sighted comment from someone when it comes to the illegal spying and warrantless wiretapping (not to mention the upcoming expanded use of spy satellites within the US) that “they have nothing to hide so who cares if the government is spying”?
Besides the fact that there is the massive collection of personal data by companies which has been lost, stolen or otherwise compromised – leading to identity theft and countless hours (and money) spent by individuals to deal with this, and there is the use of this data for nonstop bombardment of targeted marketing campaigns, it is the slipperiest of slopes to argue this position.
But, as Van Buren so aptly noted in his (or her) comment, it is the excusing of basically every OTHER right under the first ten amendments that are being shrugged off in the name of a false sense of security, while the one amendment that is completely taboo to talk in any reasonable or rational manner without the NRA or other interest group to blow the entire argument out of proportion, take comments out of context and generally lose the ability to have any rational conversation.
And that is precisely why the counter argument should hit on the right to bear arms. Certainly this is an issue that generates a lot of passion, and I see two benefits here of using this counter argument: (1) it exposes the sheer hypocrisy of so easily giving up a basic right – whether it be free speech, religious freedom, habeas corpus, or against unreasonable search and seizure – while vehemently dismissing outright (rightfully so, I might add) even the thought of taking away the right to own any gun that anyone wants to own, with as little restriction from regulation as possible; and (2) it raises the specter that, if the government can chip away at or flat out take away any other rights, then what is to stop it from taking away the right to protect yourself?
The bar keeps getting moved when it comes to other rights. Free speech zones are a perfect example. Censoring what Pearl Jam did in the Lollapalooza show is another example. Pre-screened “town hall meetings”, secret data rooms, spy satellites, expanding the authority of the Attorney General or President way beyond any plausibly rational or Constitutional authority when it comes to torture, spying or whatever else they want to do are some other examples.
And for those who don’t think that it happens all the time, or has been happening for longer than you may know, I will refer to a line that struck me from Jesselyn Radack’s excellent book, The Canary in The Coalmine that almost knocked me over when I read it. She was talking about her first contacts with Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff and how the government was able to get certain information related to this without either party having any idea. This is from the Columbia Journalism Review and is titled “Who’s Tracking Your Calls?” (emphasis mine):
So who traced Isikoff’s calls? In the final analysis it really doesn’t matter whether the justice Department did, and shared the information with Hawkins Delafield, or whether the firm did, and shared the information with the department. Either way the government got a record of Isikoff’s calls to an important source on an important story, without either party’s knowing about it. It’s a quick lesson on how far an irate government may go to burn your source.
Now, imagine that the government bursts into your home, and instead of taking your computer, files and other personal information, it takes away your guns, ammo and license. Just because they (1) have a suspicion that you may have done something wrong or may eventually use them in a crime (even though there is no real basis for that suspicion) and (2) because they can. And, let’s also say that this was happening with regularity, was relatively random, and generally didn’t result in anything other than the wrongful confiscation of guns and ammo. Somehow, I don’t think that the NRA or the population of gun owners will be too happy about this development.
But it’s no big deal, right? You probably weren’t going to use the gun anyway, so who really cares?
Suddenly, the argument shifts and it is a bit more offensive than just the right to a fair and speedy trial, to hear evidence against you, to face your accuser, to exercise free speech and to not have unreasonable warrantless spying on you, confiscation of your computer and bugging of your phones.
Strange where peoples’ priorities are.
also in orange
I don’t know if it’s necessarily a question of where priorities are. The fact of the matter is, there is no National Phone Call Privacy Association, National Open Town Hall Meeting Organization or National E-Mail Privacy Group that is akin to the NRA and it’s sound machine. The NRA is a laser focused single-issue organization that does not really see the fact their cause overlaps all these other free speech issues and liberties. They focus on that one issue, gun ownership and its obvious directly affiliated issues.
In my view, it is the mainstream media and our national journalistic network which should be keeping the American people’s eyes focused on the steady disintegration of their constitutional rights. The reality is that the vast, vast majority of the American people have no idea that this is even occurring nor do they have any idea of the long term implications of this grab for power that is taking place daily. The major media, on whom most Americans rely for their information, has been missing in action on reporting these developments. And with no NRA comparable organization existing which can saturate the American consciousness with the fact of what is going on, the public remains totally ignorant. If such an organization existed and could bring to bear all the forces comparable to those which the NRA has martialed for their cause, I believe you would see a far greater outcry than we currently have witnessed. So far, it is mostly those “elitists”, “crazy lefty bloggers” and DFH’s that are raising flags. And we all know they just hate America, the troops, George Bush and they want us to lose in Iraq. That’s why they are raising such a stink, right?
Plain and simple, most people are ignorant to what it occurring.
good points, but this was less of an indictment on the NRA than it was a way to flip the “I have nothing to hide” argument on its head.
It may work better for people who aren’t as passionate as gun owners are but may make them see things a bit differently.
maybe that last line in the diary isn’t the best line to use there….
No clammy, your point is obvious and well presented.
It is a damn shame though, isn’t it, that people are so numbed to the possibility; no, the reality, of losing what, to them, seem to be distant and intangible things such as freedom of speech, freedom against unreasonable search and seizure and the existence of habeas corpus. But yet they get all frothy and spastic about their wooden and steel toys called guns. I guess because a gun is something they can hold in their hands, look at and physically identify, while the others are more ethereal and distant. I’m certainly not against gun ownership. I have guns and I like to shoot. But I value the intangible rights as much or more. Cause as rapidly as those are disappearing, hanging onto our guns doesn’t sound like such an unnecessary thing.
In my “anonymous” blogging capacity I happen to write about spying, data mining and all sorts of other government abuses and why they should not have your data. Most people being reasonably honest just don’t see the dangers.
In the past I used to get trade magazines about government IT which of course included tidbits about data mining, whose company was on the “leading edge” of all this crap and so forth.
Well, a couple of article quotes later and viola!
The magazines stopped coming.
An addition to this is
How does one in this environment truely know thy enemy.
The watch’s central axis operates on a three-arm carousel apparatus that is made out of aluminium. The carousel is partially open-worked and the numerals that are not in use are blocked by the aluminum bridges of the mechanism. The minutes are features at the bottom-most layer of the dial in green colour. The minutes are pointed at by a red tipped
https://limpa.bg/blogs/324475/los-grandes-jugadores-occidentales-seiko-no-necesitan-lanzamiento