I would be interested in hearing that argument. On the surface it appears to be an argument of creating special privileged groups who are the only ones who have freedom of speech or the ability to avoid having troops billeted in their dwellings. Maybe that would lead to more safety?
That makes me think of the society from Heinlein's Starship Troopers where you had to earn citizenship through civic duty. He certainly portrayed the non-citizens having a safe existence (during peacetime).
Comments
But it could be argued that we would be a safer country if all of the rights in the bill of rights were collective rather than individual.
I would be interested in hearing that argument. On the surface it appears to be an argument of creating special privileged groups who are the only ones who have freedom of speech or the ability to avoid having troops billeted in their dwellings. Maybe that would lead to more safety?
That makes me think of the society from Heinlein's Starship Troopers where you had to earn citizenship through civic duty. He certainly portrayed the non-citizens having a safe existence (during peacetime).
Safety was never the primary goal.