Ever since 2001 this topic has been popping up all over the news. What is more important: our rights as citizens of the United States, or the security of our nation from terrorists and all who mean us harm.
On one side, we are guaranteed certain rights by our constitution and by its Bill of Rights. Such as the writ of habeas corpus, the right to not be searched without a warrant, freedom of speech and of the press, and the right to bear arms.
Before I continue, let me explain that many people do not understand the writ of habeas corpus. The Latin words roughly translate to: you have the body". The actually right of habeas corpus means that you can demand to be put before a court if you believe that the government/prison has no right to hold you. But if you read where it is stated in the constitution in Article 1, Section 9 it states, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." There has been some talk of how this right is being infringed upon by our government and its war on terrorism. However, isn't threat of massive terrorist attacks a major problem to our public safety?
But back to the main point. Should these rights be held above our need for public safety. Both sides of the argument have made good points. We are guaranteed rights. Should our government change the laws because of crisis situations? Could we keep all of our rights and still ensure our national security?
What do you guys think?
On one side, we are guaranteed certain rights by our constitution and by its Bill of Rights. Such as the writ of habeas corpus, the right to not be searched without a warrant, freedom of speech and of the press, and the right to bear arms.
Before I continue, let me explain that many people do not understand the writ of habeas corpus. The Latin words roughly translate to: you have the body". The actually right of habeas corpus means that you can demand to be put before a court if you believe that the government/prison has no right to hold you. But if you read where it is stated in the constitution in Article 1, Section 9 it states, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." There has been some talk of how this right is being infringed upon by our government and its war on terrorism. However, isn't threat of massive terrorist attacks a major problem to our public safety?
But back to the main point. Should these rights be held above our need for public safety. Both sides of the argument have made good points. We are guaranteed rights. Should our government change the laws because of crisis situations? Could we keep all of our rights and still ensure our national security?
What do you guys think?
