New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is no stranger to controversy. His latest comments about privacy and reinterpreting the Constitution are just the latest example. The press is typically compliant; but are the people?
An amazing thing happened in the comment section of an editorial regarding Bloomberg’s latest comments at New Jersey.com. Bloomberg’s statement, if you haven’t heard, were made at a news conference on Monday. In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing, he said:
“The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry…But we live in a complex word where you’re going to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change…”
Bloomberg’s comments seemed to be supported in the editorial, as the author said, “Many people would gladly trade their privacy for the sake of greater security.” Oh really? The phrase brings to mind a recent incident in Florida where teacher Cheryl Sabb dictated the following sentence to her fourth grade class after a local attorney visited to discuss the Bill of Rights:
“I am willing to give up some of my constitutional rights in order to be safer or more secure.”
The comment section of the editorial proved to be far more compelling than the piece itself, as person after person decried Mayor Michael Bloomberg for his overreach. The comments were comforting, as they show that Americans can actually think for themselves. Some highlights:
- “Another Nanny Statist who doesn’t believe he needs to change the Constitution by Amendment but can tramp on any part that gets in the way of more Government power.”
- “…Bloomberg evidently sees himself as a savior of mankind with his city bans on personal choices. I choose freedom and not his distorted philosophy, thank you.”
- “Bloomberg offers no new vision. He is just the latest to market paternalism in guise of security…”
The idea of trading “rights” for security seems to be popular these days. What do you think about Bloomberg’s comments? Do you agree with the statement made by the author of the editorial? Is it indeed true that “Many people would gladly trade their privacy for the sake of greater security.” Or do you agree instead with Benjamin Franklin’s assertion that “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”?
Image Source: TheBlaze