Any Trade-Off between Security Versus Liberty (Essay Sample)

Student’s Name Instructor Course Title Date Any Trade-Off between Security Versus Liberty If you were to choose between security and liberty, which side would you trade-off? Security versus liberty is a tricky subject of discussion, and unless people understand the two aspects, trading off one side to the other becomes hard. Many people would ask themselves whether to choose between being secure or having liberty. The research paper aims to explore the trade-off between security and liberty, thus answering the choice between security and liberty (Waldron, p.3). Security can be defined as the form of being protected from any physical harm or vulnerability caused by others. While liberty is the will or freedom that one possesses and can use to serve their purpose Benjamin Franklin in his famous words, said that anyone who sacrifices their liberty for security does not stand a chance in either of the two rights. Today, people have to choose what to gain or lose concerning liberty and security in the modern world. Liberty may mean a state of being free from coercion within a community or a country. It means no authority that stands to challenge one's behavior or views, and one is free from oppressive restrictions. This concept can be associated with legal frameworks that provide individual rights and freedom. For any democratic society, according to Johannesburg principles, there is a need for freedom of expression and information (Allhoff, p.53). With this, an individual enjoys their human rights and fundamental values. With the contemporary example of the war on terror, the debate between liberty and security can be more noticeable, indicating the trade-off. This is because, during times of war, the liberty choice becomes a luxury item at that point (Waldron, p.20). A mere sacrifice of an individual's freedom of expression, speech, right to information, and new technologies for security is a great loss and not again. Based on the united states, every citizen deserves equal liberty and safety, and thus no one should have trade-off one value to gain the other. For US citizens, the concept of individual rights extends beyond the idea of individual comfort. Hence to them, one cannot surrender personal liberties and get compromised. Thus personal liberty cannot be traded for national security as every individual is guaranteed protection of the two rights (Allhoff, p.53). Author; Dreamtime Author; Tim Donner on bearing rift Taking the case of Americans, the debate on security and liberty has been their forethought. Since their Christmas bombing, citizens have been forced to decide to maintain their liberty at the expense of their security and safety protection. Americans believe the key foundation is liberty, as they believe once liberty is lost, it's hard to be restored. There is a need to balance security and liberty because losing either side is costly, and for the maximum enjoyment of the fundamental rights, the two must be present (Allhoff, p.53). Americans witnessed liberty and security; they perceived them as similar. With their Christmas bombing, the citizens of America have shown willingness to sacrifice their liberty in exchange for safety. People often talk about the effective balance between security and liberty, and it should be noted achieving the balance should not come with conflict or tension. Hence liberty protection should not stand to hobble the country’s security, and rather security policies should seek to fight against nation threats and not undermine people's liberty. The United States recognizes the two as fundamental rights. In their constitutional grace, the Americans believe in securing the liberty blessing to themselves and prosperity and that any threat to the security of Americans serves threat to their liberties as well (Kawata, Keisuke, and Masaki p.22). While security should be a great consideration for any nation, there are clear limits on how far citizens should stretch in pursuit of security. Liberty entails security; if one loses privacy and security, it becomes disastrous. It can be argued that whenever liberty and privacy are lost, privacy is automatically lost (Kawata, Keisuke, and Masaki p.22). Author: Ashish Channawar The security conditions are privacy and liberty, and thus, the trade-off is more complicated than it is thought. It should be noted that there should be a proper balance between liberty and safety. And if not so, the choice should be trading liberty for security. Trading off liberty makes people vulnerable to safety and security issues compared to retaining it. With the government powers, citizens enjoy less freedom, so people should trade off liberty for security. Any nation's government is powerful enough to provide its citizens with all rights and, at the same time, deprive everything their citizens have (Kawata, Keisuke, and Masaki p.22). Thus any power given to the government by its citizens can be misused against them...