LIBERTY VS. SECURITY

DON Rowe (Letters, Nov. 24) brings up the ideals of the "founding fathers"
in his argument against suspension of civil liberties.

While his argument has some merit, we should not necessarily think that the
founding fathers envisioned anything like the world that we now live in.
America was much smaller then; it may or may not have been less diverse,
but did people who didn't fit the "social norm" really have full rights?
Would they have chosen a certain amount of security over freedom? We don't
know.

Also, there is a gray line between conceding some civil liberties and
living in a police state. There are plenty of liberties that we don't have
even now in this country; they are restricted by laws which are intended to
ensure that most people are safe from fewer people who would do as they choose.

Jay Miller Scotts Valley