| Question Home |
Position:Home>History> History help pleeeeeease!?Question: History help pleeeeeease!!? Discuss and examine the limitations placed upon freedom after 9/11!.
Compare those circumstances with those during both the McCarthy era and World War I!. What is the balance between security and freedom during war!? Does the Constitution protect citizens’ rights during wartime!? Should dissent be equated with lack of patriotism!?Www@QuestionHome@Com Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: These are rough answers because the questions are pretty wide open and could take pages to answer!. Limitations on freedom after 9/11!. Minor restrictions of movement for people on "no fly" lists!. Freedom of privacy impinged upon by increased electronic surveylance by intellegence agencies, with questionable oversight to avoid abuses!. However, no wide scale changes in the ability of citizens to move around the country, or to speak out!. During McCarthy era anyone attempting to speak out risked being blacklisted, hauled in front of a congressional hearing, and at risk of being chaged with some trumped up charge!. Literally only a handful of American citizens have found themselves being held under condtions that violate their civil rights after 9/11, as opposed to dozens of people who were hounded, persecuted, and had their lives damaged during McCarthy era!. It's a little less clear on non-citizens, since there is some question as to what rights are "human rights" vs!. citizen rights!. In world war 1 a number of people found themselves under arrest for sedition, denyed their constitutional rights!. The balance between security and freedom almost inevitably leans towards security in wartime!. Lives are at stake in war, and people are more willing to surrender their rights under those conditions!. The Constitution says nothing about the rights of citizens being reduced during wartime!. However, Lincoln set the precidents in the Civil War with the suspension of Habeas Corpus and other constitutional rights during that time!. Ultimately the Constitution is a piece of paper!. People with guns can and will supercede it, unless others are willing to stand up to the guns to support the Constitution!. Should dissent be equated with lack of patriotism!? no!. One can disagree with the set policies of the government, and to epxress that disagreement is well within a person's rights!. Dissent is often taken as a lack of patriotism however!. Its difficult to determine a motive for dissent, so unless a person makes very explicit statements or another person is a mindreader, its impossible to determine if the dissent is a demonstration of patriotism or a reflection on a person's dislike of the government!.Www@QuestionHome@Com |