Comment: Rand did not answer his question

(See in situ)


Rand did not answer his question

The newscaster feels safer if government expanded specifically in this arena to install surveillance cameras at terror targets. The argument that private cameras and not government cameras caught these suspects avoids the question that if government cameras were installed would they have caught the suspects sooner. Can you sacrifice liberty for safety? Why not? Would it be better to have more liberty and less safety? In my opinion yes, but we need to find clear arguments to address this question as it seems the GOP is especially vulnerable to disagree with this part of the constitution. People do not believe our government is or could be abusive is part of the problem.