There seems to be a stink being raised nationwide about the new TSA airport security measures. At least the Drudge Report is all over it. A member of the House spoke on the floor about it. The New York Times talks about it too.
As a government formed by the people, our leaders are in place because, directly or indirectly, we the people had some say in them getting where they are. This government was designed (I believe as evidenced by the Constitution) to be in existence as only by consent of the governed. Simply, the gov is there because we put it there.
Back to this TSA invasiveness issue: when we feel a government entity is overstepping its bounds, even in the name of keeping us safe from terrorists, can our opinions as citizens be overridden by the "expertise" of a Security Agency? I also read that Germany raised its security level based upon evidence of a suspected terrorist attack. It is the experts taking care of the normal people.
Of course I don't think it inappropriate for government to be involved in national defense. That is one of the enumerated roles of government. But can our voices be overridden in the name of security? Will we be subjected to safety procedures of which we have no say in? The names of Safety and Security have been used before-good intentions or not-to grow the power of the government and shrink the influence of the people. There is a reason to be suspicious and I am glad there is a national outcry against the TSA methods. We will see what happens.
No comments:
Post a Comment