Burlington High School
Burlington, Kansas
Teacher: Devra Parker
The Price of Freedom
By John Cantrell
12th grade
When you wake up in the morning, are you able to go into your kitchen, grab a cup of coffee, and walk out onto your front porch and smoke a cigarette? When you have finished, are you able to get into your car and drive to work, give the guy that cut you off the finger, and continue on your way? While in your business meeting, can you speak your mind, whatever your opinion is? Are you able to talk to anyone you’re wishing to speak with? The answer to all of these questions is yes. If you can do all of these things then you most definitely live in the greatest country in the world: The United States of America; this remarkable country, provides us with all of these incredible freedoms which no other country in the world has. But [these liberties] come with a price.
People take their personal freedoms and individual rights for granted. If the American people thought about what it’s like elsewhere then they would be truly happy to have what [they] have. Everyone thinks that [they] have the right to do whatever they want whenever they want to do it, without a price.
Our country…provides safety,…public schools, parks, libraries, food, and so on. The American society is so used to [having] all of these things provided, no questions asked, that they have forgotten what it is like to live without. If we as Americans want to continue to have all of these great things, then we must remember that they are given to us by our government and that we must give up some of our personal freedoms at times to have them.
Take protection from foreign enemies, for example. If Americans want protection from terrorists then they will have to give up some of their freedoms to get this security. When homeland security [officials are] tapping phones that they believe terrorists are using to correspond and plan their attacks, we should understand that it is for the common good….
Another way that this country has to take away a minor personal freedom to protect us is to search our bags and remove potentially dangerous things from them at airports before [passengers] board airplanes. The American people whine and complain [about] having to open their bags and take off their shoes or empty their purses. They don’t want to have to go through all of the lines and get to the airport two hours early and so on. But, they don’t whine and complain when there is a terrorist trying to get on their airplane with the intent to hijack it and is stopped by security after they find a box cutter in the heal of his shoe.
Citizens of the United States gripe at the fact that they are unable to go across the borders quickly anymore and that security is too high there. They want to be able to move more quickly without their cars being checked and having to show their passports. When the men with the mirrors on sticks search under your car, they are doing this with good intentions. And, our inhabitants find this pointless and unnecessary and just a waste of their precious time that they could use to be doing something more fruitful and productive. They don’t object so quickly when the men with the guns stop a car bomber from crossing the border and driving into our country to blow up buildings, schools and their neighborhoods.
The strict rule dealing with the right to bear arms is yet another issue in the area of personal rights that has to be given up for the common good…. Shouldn’t we as Americans try our hardest to keep fire arms out of the hands of dangerous people? All we have to do is show our Identification and maybe register [our] guns. How difficult does that sound?
What the American population has to understand and realize is that [there is a cost for] protection. American citizens want their cake and want to eat it, too. If we want to be protected and feel safe in our homes and communities then we have to give away some of our privileges and rights. Freedom is a definite and expensive cost that every single American is able without too much trouble to pay. The question is, when the time comes to pay that price, will we as Americans [be] up to paying?
Answers to Questions Regarding the Required Reading
Q1-What do you think Justin Reiter meant by including the following in his essay?“…if the people are not accustomed to the freedom they will be angered by the inequality.” Were you angered by some of the things Justin said in his essay? Did you agree or disagree?
I think that he meant that it was a lose-lose situation. That no matter what anyone did not everyone would ever be happy. He believes that if their not used to being free than they will only enjoy equality. But with freedom comes inequality; so people that want to be free need to get used to being in an unequal society. I agree with this statement. But I don’t agree with the general assumptions he has made about other peoples state of mind.
Q2- Explain: “He felt that the common good could be served by each individual pursuing self-interest.” To whom did Chris Carney attribute these feelings?
James Madison was used as a reference in this case because of his major influence in creating many of America’s freedoms.
Q3- In the next to the last paragraph in her essay, Faith Doyle discuses Emperor Diocletian and his Edict of 301. Relate that to the essay topic.
The Edict of 301. is an example where the government tried to enforce equality among its people. This was a complete failure because people were unmotivated to work.
Q4- Kelly Lanier says in her essay: “Even though everyone is born with the same rights here in America; sometimes a person can step on or take away the rights of another person.” Relate the example she gives and give us another one of your own.
Someone uses their rights and freedoms too much it can infringe on other people rights.
Q5- Explain what Joshua Spencer means when he says that “individual liberty is a fragile, yet powerful, asset.” How does he relate individual liberty to dictators? Do you agree with his assessment? Why or why not? Be specific.
I agree with the fact that masses are a threat and that people should stop being so dependant on each other.
Q6-Luck Hall asked “Will we maintain our freedom or destroy it to be safe?” How would you answer that question?
I believe that we have to have a good balance between both. We must protect our freedoms which people have fought and died for and protect ourselves at the same time. I know its difficult but we have done it up until now and I believe that it will continue to work.
Q7- Some people, according to which student essayist in 1999, suggested that “the Constitution's framers might have 'put greater emphasis on the protection of the community over individual liberty', had they seen the world today.”? She doesn’t agree. Do You?
Molly McGlone, and I believe that they tried to keep equality in the community through self interest.
Q8- “Just because a law may achieve desirable results, it should not take precedence over the Constitution.” Do you agree or disagree? Aaron Traffas, discusses the Ban on Smoking in Public Places and the Gun Free School Zones Act. How do you personally feel about these two issues?
I do agree with the smoking in public thing. The constitution is the supreme law, and nothing shall precedence over it. I believe that people should be able to smoke in public places if they want to and that gun free school zones are a good thing that protect children and teachers from crazy people.
Q9- Annie St. Romain referred to a book in her essay where “the government regulated every possible aspect of human life from profession to family to emotions.” What was the name of that book? Have you read it?
The book she is referring to is The Giver, and no, I have not read it.
Q10- “As nations grow in size and social complexity, governments claim greater powers to restrain individuals and groups. Those who criticize this development believe that it has gone so far as to threaten the existence of individual liberty. Others believe that only if government is granted such powers, can complex problems be solved.”This quote can be found in Jessie Veit’s essay. Which side of the issue do you support and why?
I believe that the government should be granted such powers, as long as they follow the law and give us our constitutional rights. When they overstep their grounds, then something else needs to be done.
Q11- Give three examples where personal responsibility would replace the need for laws. Do not duplicate those found in Patrick Karcher’s essay.
Like, If people used common sense then there would be no need for every house to have a smoke alarms. If people would use common sense and not pee in street, there wouldn’t be a law against it. If people wouldn’t drive like idiots and be in a big rush we would have no need for speed limit laws either.
Q12- It is obvious that Benji Lehman is idealistic. In his essay he claims when the founding fathers “wrote the constitution they put a great emphasis on each person having personal rights as well as individual liberties. The true strength of each and every community falls on the individual. Believing each man, woman, and child will, and can recognize the importance of good responsibility. … These were laws that gave each and everyone of us the opportunity and self-respect to do the right thing.” Benji believed that people would make choices that would serve and benefit their communities. Do you believe that? Please explain.
I do believe that. I think that people will do the right thing. I believe that in every person there are morals, and that everyone has a conscious. If everyone looked out for each other and watched each others backs, then we would not rely on the government so much to do our bidding.