How much are you willing to trade privacy for safety?

Unwilling. Quick, hide.

0%

If the world was free of crime, then how would the mafia work :(

What bothers me is that we are not given a choice. Unless you do extraordinary things to take yourself “off the grid” you have diminished liberty and not much safety in exchange for it, whether you want to make the trade or not.

i want 0 privacy and 100 safety.

There is no way that anyone can assure safety 100%, especially when humans are involved.

I am unwilling to give up my privacy for a precarious safety.

I think we should all be in padded rooms naked.

Interesting question. In London, I am told that you are under camera surveillance pretty much at all times. While on vacation, coworker had an expensive camera stolen, and the police were able to catch the thief using video from public cameras. They tracked him from the scene of the theft to his front door.

My father and I constantly battle this one out. He believes Big Brother should be dead. I think I could live with him…to an extent. I am indeed willing to give most of my privacy for the greater safety of the nation. How much, though, is different.

I am most unwilling. I’d rather be in danger and completely free than be caged and under scrutiny 24/7/12/365.

@Maximillian I see your dad’s point. I’m not willing to give much for the purported security of THE NATION. Whereas I’m willing to give up some personal privacy for my PERSONAL security. I think the other side of that coin is that we need to stop penalizing trivial offenses and personal tastes to make it work. Otherwise, we’ll all be in jail.

@Rufus_T_Firefly The problem is, it’s too late, and no one give you the option.

I worry a little about how all the information about a person could be used against him.

I don’t know why anyone would want to watch where I go and what I do and if someone is, I wonder how they manage to stay awake.

It really doesn’t worry me and if it makes it more difficult to be a successful criminal, that’s a good thing.

@pdworkin I agree totally. It is too late. The state now has such control over our day to day lives it frigthens me, I truly believe that the “war against terror” is being used to frighten everyone into accepting this steady erosion of even our most basic of civil liberties. We live in scary, scary times.
hugs all xx

We are forfeiting our liberty for the illusion of safety. Our dossiers are digital and, as James Thurber said, “there is no safety in numbers, or in anything else.”

As @pdworkin said the loss of privacy has already occured, without our consent. The latest increment of this, the “Patriot Act”, was passed under circumstances where opposition to the bill was considered support for terrorists. A few of its worst provisions have been repealed, but most of the intrusion remains.

What is potentially worse is the fact that evading surveillance has become, in itself, “suspicious behavior”. This triggers even more active surveillance; warrantless searches,etc. When the Gestapo kicks in your door and you shoot it out with them, it would be reported as “see…he was a terrorist, he shot at those nice policemen…”

For the most part I agree with @rooeytoo providing I am aware of it. My life isn’t exciting enough to be worried about CCTV cameras etc and if it’s for my safety and the safety of others then I am happy to lose a little bit of privacy. Obviously I am not happy to lose 100% of my privacy though, I would still like to be able to go to the toilet, get changed and have sex without being worried that I am being perved on!!!

Let’s take things a step further. Suppose we eliminated cash and we had an identity stamped onto our bodies that could be used to monitor every transaction that we made, even those done from a computer. This would help cut down on white collar crime and make it easier to track people down. How would you feel about that? It seems a bit creepy to me.

@LostInParadise I think everything that works seems creepy. It’s easy to see the benefits of what we have and imagine the worst outcomes of change. But that’s not sensible. And in the end, the future arrives despite our best efforts.

Things that probably seemed icky to someone: indentured servants presenting evidence against landowners, fingerprints, DNA evidence, facial recognition software. Everything has capability for abuse.

personally I think it’s all too much already

On the national level, I think we have given up too much privacy and we’ve gotten precious little in return. Sometimes I think that the loss of privacy is actually making things worse.

On the personal level—maybe in some parts of the cities we can have cameras everywhere. I’m not sure that bothers me. I just don’t want it to interfere with my daily life, unless, of course, I commit a crime.

I see it the same way I see fluther. There’s so much traffic that it is rare that anyone from the outside will notice anything and try to pay attention to it. No one I know will ever find me. Mostly no one cares enough to try to find me. So I am truly anonymous here and no amount of surveillance will find me. But it might find a crook.

Reminds me of What’s Up Tiger Lily, where (was it Wing Fat?) says: “Back off! My secret spy camera has taken pictures of you all through your clothes. Unless you release me, your naked photos will be sold in every school yard in Tokyo within the hour. Unless you are totally comfortable with your body, you must release me… Now, I’m going to go home, develope those pictures, and have a laugh over your chubby thighs.”

@rooeytoo The problem is that while Right and Wrong are absolute, Crime is not. Crime is nothing more or less than what you can be prosecuted for. Someone outlaws dogs? Guess who just became a criminal?
Okay, that’s a silly example. But you get the picture.

omg @Nullo – what are you doing back in a 2010 question????

If anyone outlaws dogs, I will be a criminal for sure and my dogs and I will hightail it to the bush and disappear!