The Thought of Security over Freedom
The preference to be free instead of secure is controversial, often qualified. Many oppose the thought of security over freedom, but in more recent years that has not been the case. The definition of freedom varies indefinitely, but the ability of acting, or saying as one wants without hindrance or restraint is favored by us all. Freedom, in thought, is beneficial and gives one the aptitude of attaining all one can possibility dream of, but in reality, it is comprised of the liberty of choices that can possibly result in risks, or failure. The capability of doing whatever we truly desire may lead to jeopardy, or detrimental consequences, this possibility is what one is so exceptionally afraid of; failure. The right to keep and bear arms has been a constitutional right since the 18th century; the ability to acquire a weapon has been idolized by many and has given us the civil liberty to defend ourselves if needed to do so. But the right to bear arms does not yield the right to kill at random. On December 14, 2012 twenty-seven innocent lives were taken in Newport, Connecticut. Majority of the lives lost were less than 7 years of age, and were unmercifully shot with a machine gun. The freedom of attaining a gun does not condone the innocent lives of children lost. The security of these poor lives was taken because of the freedom given to our country. It is assumed that security plays a definite role in happiness. The safer one feels, the happier they are. Studies have shown that the happiest parts of the world feel at peace with their government, and feel secure. Americans are living in fear of the next terrorist attack, or the next corrupt shooting. And as a result, we choose a path that favors security over freedom. When the planes hit the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001, America immersed in terror and shock that is still present today. Everyone was willing to give up their privacy in any means in order to attain just the least bit safer, or any other