Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Right now it seems like he's willing to defend he and his friend's personal safety (his friend's safety as an after thought mind you), but he doesn't much care about the safety of people he's upset with.


sort by: page size:

My feeling is that the guy with his arm around his friend has more to fear from over zealous citizens than form the authorities.

I don't think safety is the only thing that matters to people.

Most people care far more about feeling safe than being safe.

Ya, well I'd rather be safe than feel safe.

I think you're conflating politics and safety.

They care maasively about their own safety over the safety of terrorist-sympathizers.

Very well written. I would also add they dont just want safety, they want someone else to make it safe for them. They dont want to be responsible for their own safety.

What a dilemma: I don't want dangerous people running around hurting people, and I don't trust the government to use such power responsibly.

There's one thing more human than that, and that is to react with fear and anger when someone senselessly endangers their lives.

I don't really like putting my safety in the hands of malicious actors.

Good point on the presumably different behavior of people who might underestimate how much at/of a risk they actually are.

And I agree that the weakest the "protect others" is, the least justifiable mandates are. The story is definitely not as straightforward as it's often portrayed.

Thank you for the peaceful exchange, I've very much enjoyed it.


"It’s been a bit of a slow realization for me, but I don’t actually want to be safe, I’d rather be free and unsafe."

This, I believe, is the key tension in democracies. A majority of the constituents can be scared into compromises for "their security", not fully understanding what they are really giving up. A large number would rather "feel safe" than "feel free".


It's not personal safety, it's sizing up the situation.

Personally I think they don't think about this. They want to feel safe and that's where the thinking ends.

If we're going the analogies here, this is more like someone with a gun pointed at them worrying that they may get shot. "Stop worrying!" you say. "You can trust the person holding the gun! They almost never shoot people who don't deserve it!"

Why would you want anybody not to be safer?

That sort of depends on your threat model. Are you making some ideological stand, or are you protecting yourself from harassment by the authorities?

It's not so weird to expect that your friends will acquiesce to your demand that they wear a seatbelt in your car, for instance.


And, if the only people they were putting at risk by being out and about was themselves, that would be fine. But that's not the case.

The “safety” they’re talking about isn’t about actual danger but more like responses that don’t comply with the political groupthink de jour.
next

Legal | privacy