The NSA, Liberty, and Safety

Although the Amash Amendment failed in the House of Representatives, the very concept of the amendment and its near-success brought about some symbolic political ripple-affects. It revealed a chink in Boehner's armor for one, showing that neither the House Republican leadership or Democratic leadership were solid in terms of this type of surveillance. Furthermore, it has yet again dragged back to the forefront the constitutionality of this surveillance and the eternal question, how much liberty should we rescind for alleged safety?

As one would expect, many arguments again erupted along the lines of Benjamin Franklin's famous quote:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"

Now one might logically argue, with the entrance of weapons of mass destruction to the game, that the rules have changed and they would make a good point. However, the crux of Franklin's argument is perhaps that, you can never be truly safe?

Many members of congress, the president, and FBI Director Mueller have all argued that such surveillance is paramount. The latter goes on to even say that this surveillance could have even prevented 9/11. Taking them at their word just briefly, let's look at this issue objectively. Here are the American casualty numbers since September 11, for this War on Terror, including almost anything that you could loosely tie-in (Iraq):

September 11 Attacks: 2,996 dead
War in Afghanistan: 2,246 of the armed services +1,143 contractors = 3,389 total dead
War in Iraq:  4,487 of the armed services + 1,554 contractors = 6,041 total dead
Fort Hood Shootings: 13 dead
Benghazi Attack: 4 dead
Boston Bombings (and aftermath): 5 dead

Grand Total: 12,448

If you look at the numbers alone, they might be staggering. The loss of so many Americans is tragic and definitely represents the heavily toll our country has paid for the gains made in this War on Terror. But, in the wake of all the laws we have passed since 9/11, such as the Patriot Act, it demands the question, are we really all that safe?

Sure, you can argue, we might be safer from Islamic Fundamentalists. But at what cost? While we rescind our basic constitutional rights in the euphoria related to terrorism, we often forget that there are a great many dangers in this life and odds are, a terrorist blast will not be what ends your life. Looking at recent numbers from the CDC for 2010, the other dangers are in fact much greater:

Heart Disease: 597,689 dead
Cancer: 574,743 dead
Stroke: 129,476 dead

That is 1,301,638 Americans dead from three ailments alone in 2010. Throw in the roughly 30,000 Americans that die on our roads each year, that number of 1.3 plus million Americans in one year trumps the casualties from our decade plus long War on Terror quite easily.  So while members of our government like Mueller beseech us that the constitutionally-dubious NSA surveillance is imperative to keep us safe from harm, our struggles with heart disease, cancer and stroke prevention show such fears are misguided and misplaced.

It is ironic that many Americans bemoan the inefficiency and ineptitude of our government at nearly every level, but when the concept national security is brought to the forefront, we all the sudden toss aside these predispositions and believe that the government will act upon this information derived from trampling the constitution with vigor, clarity, and precision. If so, then why did this information not prevent the Fort Hood Massacre? The Boston Marathon Bombing? Such thinking is tantamount to the would-be inventor bemoaning the fact that someone beat him to implementing his great idea after seeing it on TV. Our government is excellent at having ideas but horrible at implementing them. To think our government will act efficiently despite itself with the data derived from the NSA surveillance is nothing short of complete denial.

Make no mistake, this is not a call of rolling back the War on Terror or isolationism. It is only a call for rational talk, as with what Amash offered on the floor of the house, in regards to safety and liberty. Before we willingly give over our rights, we must truly think about what is to be gained from such actions as well as what dangers still loom despite such actions. As Ben Franklin points out, being safe from one thing might not exactly make you safe from another.




References:



http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/justin-amash-nsa-amendment-94722.html
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57589143/fbi-director-surveillance-programs-might-have-prevented-9-11/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ft._Hood_shooting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_bombings
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1105.pdf