From: Mike McNally <m5@vail.tivoli.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 08:04:21 +0800
To: "CyberAngels Director : Colin Gabriel Hatcher" <angels@wavenet.com>
Subject: Re: Freedom and security
In-Reply-To: <v01510107a9e4964f3008@[198.147.118.206]>
Message-ID: <3184BA68.1AEC@vail.tivoli.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


CyberAngels Director : Colin Gabriel Hatcher wrote:

> The relationship / balance between security and freedom is always a
> defining factor in a society.  My point is that a society with no laws and
> no codes of conduct is not a free society. 

You have your definition of "free", and others have theirs.


> My position is to seek a balance between the freedom of the individual and
> the security of the community.  My argument is that when the security of
> the community is threatened by the freedom of the individual, the community
> will always prioritise its safety.  Good government of course means
> maintaining individual freedoms *and* maintaining community security.  I
> actually disagree that they are antithetical.  On the contrary they are a
> balance that any society has to find. 

If they weren't antithetical, there'd be no need for a balance. 

______c_____________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * pain is inevitable  
       m5@tivoli.com * m101@io.com          *
      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         * suffering is optional