General Discussion

hughee99

(16,113 posts)

37. I think the idea that the program will save 200 people a year,

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 04:36 PM

Jun 2013

is designed for the purpose of giving the program credit for things that haven't been proven. I'm not sure the program prevents ANY deaths. I know this is based on a discussion in another thread (I don't blame you for the question, you didn't write it). I think most of the serious, organized terrorists already assumed that this sort of surveillance was going on (as did many Americans).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

75 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A question about the NSA debate for any parents out there. [View all] pnwmom Jun 2013 OP

Parents would give up their lives for their kids. Is there anything they would disallow? dkf Jun 2013 #1

I don't know. And that is the problem. That is why there will always be a struggle pnwmom Jun 2013 #2

Yep. "Think about the children!" justifies all sorts of awful things. (nt) Posteritatis Jun 2013 #8

Well I'm thinking of how the children would live with an oppressive government. dkf Jun 2013 #15

The number one cause of childhood deaths in this country is automobile accidents WestStar Jun 2013 #3

I realize that of course. But could you please answer my question pnwmom Jun 2013 #10

good and thoughtful post. thanks. Whisp Jun 2013 #4

I remember that video. Thanks! And there was a perfect example at Sandy Hook. pnwmom Jun 2013 #13

It doesn't matter what *anyone* is willing to give up magellan Jun 2013 #5

Rights are not absolute. Not speech, nor privacy. There are circumstances for the Common Good where KittyWampus Jun 2013 #6

+1. nt pnwmom Jun 2013 #11

That's all well and good. magellan Jun 2013 #17

+1 treestar Jun 2013 #67

Do you have children? Could you answer my question, please? pnwmom Jun 2013 #7

I don't have children magellan Jun 2013 #18

That would be entirely unworkable. But having cars manufactured with breathalyzers pre-installed pnwmom Jun 2013 #20

Great! Then be prepared for the continued deaths magellan Jun 2013 #26

There would still be a reduction in deaths, just as safety-locks on guns pnwmom Jun 2013 #28

You didn't answer my question. magellan Jun 2013 #31

I don't know. What are the options? But I think I'm okay pnwmom Jun 2013 #50

This message was self-deleted by its author magellan Jun 2013 #31

And then there was Boston nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #9

And they could not get a FISA warrant based on "Russia said he's been radicalized." DevonRex Jun 2013 #19

they can't win treestar Jun 2013 #68

Actually, when I saw that post HappyMe Jun 2013 #12

Or the kids at Sandy Hook elementary. If those deaths could have been prevented pnwmom Jun 2013 #14

Not just 200 deaths Andy823 Jun 2013 #16

May I suggest a long reading of the Church Committee nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #21

Terrorists can be internal threats. pnwmom Jun 2013 #23

So you are ok with infiltrating peace groups nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #25

None of this stuff is needed for that treestar Jun 2013 #70

Is that ok? neverforget Jun 2013 #72

Probably. If you are out in public starting a group, anyone can walk up to it treestar Jun 2013 #73

Wow nebenaube Jun 2013 #42

Plus, how did they get the information for that memo? treestar Jun 2013 #69

So the question is Andy823 Jun 2013 #33

The reality is that these programs are over bloated nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #38

I am not afraid of "communists" Andy823 Jun 2013 #39

No surveillance can guarantee what you want nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #40

One more time Andy823 Jun 2013 #41

Exactly. HappyMe Jun 2013 #44

I am sorry you are that afraid. nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #53

OK Andy823 Jun 2013 #56

It's not whether they are acceptable or not nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #58

no. nebenaube Jun 2013 #43

Really Andy823 Jun 2013 #45

because none of it works... nebenaube Jun 2013 #52

OK Andy823 Jun 2013 #57

You should read what Richard Clarke has to say nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #61

No... nebenaube Jun 2013 #74

Yes. And imagine if there was another 9/11 -- or something much worse. pnwmom Jun 2013 #22

Yep Andy823 Jun 2013 #46

that's a good point treestar Jun 2013 #71

I agree. HappyMe Jun 2013 #24

That is an imaginary scenario supported by nothing. Jesus, just stop it. n/t DirkGently Jun 2013 #27

I'm responding to an earlier OP that took your basic point of view. pnwmom Jun 2013 #29

Okey doke. Just trying to help. nt. DirkGently Jun 2013 #30

Here's one for you. Since we all know there will be some abuse of any power, Bluenorthwest Jun 2013 #34

^^^this^^^ malokvale77 Jun 2013 #54

The OP is only interested in hyperbolic bait pulled out of the right side of the drama box. Bluenorthwest Jun 2013 #60

I know... malokvale77 Jun 2013 #63

Parents accept that their kids may be killed FarCenter Jun 2013 #35

But would it be okay with you if we stopped collecting meta-data pnwmom Jun 2013 #48

I would prefer that NSA continue to collect and store metadata from all of the telecom carriers FarCenter Jun 2013 #65

Ask that question to the parents of kids in the military Duer 157099 Jun 2013 #36

I think the idea that the program will save 200 people a year, hughee99 Jun 2013 #37

My thought was... malokvale77 Jun 2013 #47

I don't believe Snowden's claim that he could have looked at anyone's emails or other personal pnwmom Jun 2013 #49

The tip of the iceberg malokvale77 Jun 2013 #51

I do not have kids but I do have a loving family of which I dont have any one of them killed in a Thinkingabout Jun 2013 #55

This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Jun 2013 #59

I'd break every law on the books for my kids if I knew it would protect them DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2013 #62

If you think this is all OK... malokvale77 Jun 2013 #64

There can never really be an actual choice like that treestar Jun 2013 #66

Frankly, that question smacks of the questions asked of conscientious objectors - Ms. Toad Jun 2013 #75