Corona Virus as a means to expand State control?

This data will come available in the future for the government one way or another. I do not really see it as something bad. if it can prevent mass shootings and bombings, why not accept it.

 

Hmm. Let’s see. Do you remember the Zika Virus? The very real concern that arose was: Public Health vs. Individual Right (2nd amendment). Example: A man is known to have open barrels of water in his back yard in Florida (yes, Zika got to Florida), mosquitoes are perhaps seen reproducing there. When a public health worker shows up to as him to dump the barrels, he pulls a shotgun out and says “Get off my property.”
Who is right? Who is wrong? Are both right? COVID-19 is different, but staying inside for two weeks means the virus will die out. That’s right: die out. A CURE. Seriously. What measures should be taken to destroy this virus? What is too far? Smallpox was eliminated by depriving the Ho tribe in India of there right NOT to be vaccinated. They were, against their will. Smallpox is gone.

 

Government surveillance is already a reality practically everywhere and will become only more pervasive over time.

 

This is true of all governments. Unfortunately. China is ‘disappearing’ people who say the virus is running rampant there. Notice the Chinese say no more cases? I’m the first one to say governments are overreaching... but to every rule is an exception. In this case: public health is paramount.

 

I mean idk about surveillance etc. but Hungary just became the first dictature of EU, so there's that. It's clearly possible to use this (or any danger, like faked revolution in Turkey) to centralize all the power to the government. Unfortunately democracy seems to be fragile.

 

look at what CCP done he shut the one who found COV19, he surveilance all the uyghur just because what they believe

im not racist here i respect chinnese but not the mainland one

 

And then you willingly give up your freedom for security.

 

They are already doing it. Everything's happening. The only catch is that recent events may lead them into doing it openly now.

 

I see it different. I think my freedom will increase if there is a reduce in crimes, murders, kidnapping. How more safety, how more freedom

 

Do u really think that the government and your carrier provider doesn't know your current location?! Every move, everyone's location, whatever you digitally do and . . . are tracked and recorded. How else r they going to find terrorists or solve crimes or keep people safe?

 

I'm so tired of this arguement. It's just silly. Literally everybody gives up some amount of freedom for security. The fact that murder and rape are illegal, means we have given up some of our freedom in order to ensure our safety and the safety of others.

If you truly believe you should never sacrifice any amount of freedom for your safety or the safety of others, I can pretty much bet you are NOT living that way. Nobody is, and they probably wouldn't want to. Sometimes safety is more important than certain freedoms.

 

Surley you cannot be saying that outlawing raping and murdering is giving up a part of our freedom to rape and murder.

 

I mean technically it is though.

 

IDK, if you look at it, as a Christian who is aware of the time we going through, it does make sense.

 

It is... that's literally what it is. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it literally is giving up freedom for safety. That's what laws are. So this argument that we should never give up freedom in exchange for safety, is stupid, because we all do that all the time, and in most cases it is a good thing.

How can you say that outlawing murder doesn't mean that we are giving up our freedom to murder, in exchange for safety? And more than just safety, also morality of course. But that's literally what it is. If we truly had full freedom to do whatever we want, we wouldn't have any laws. All laws take away a bit of our freedom. That's just a fact. You seem to think by stating this fact, I'm saying we shouldn't have laws. Not at all. I'm saying that we shouldn't have full freedom to do whatever we want, because society would be complete chaos.

 

You can't make that analogy. Criminal trials are public so that the courts are kept in check by the people so that power is not misused. When it comes to surveillance, the situation is completely different - there is zero oversight (except of whistleblowers who are not protected by the law). There is nothing to stop the government from spying on your private life and you will likely not even know about it.

 

Yeah, actually, I can, and I did. Obviously they aren't exactly the same, but they are both sacrificing freedom for protection. If the government is surveying people for no reason, then yeah, that's messed up. If they're doing it for our safety and protection, then I honestly don't really care.

 

You can make that analogy but it does not mean it is correct , allowing the freedom to murder and rape stops the victim having the freedom to not be murdered and raped. That is the true trade off ,one person's freedom cannot be at the expense of another's freedom.
Governments can always justify thier oppressive and intrusive laws. Governments do lie and continue to lie, remember Blair's weapons of mass destruction. Blair and Bush justified that war on the grounds that the public were in danger from those weapons.

( This is a very enjoyable discussion )