2 votes
Jun 28, 2015

This isn't an either/or question if you present it like this without any qualifiers, it always depends on the circumstances. In the United States you can look at weapons for both sides of this issue: on the one hand people aren't allowed to keep nuclear bombs or cruise missiles or anthrax, demonstrating a prioritization of security over freedom, on the other hand they are allowed to keep pretty much all the small arms they'd like, a prioritization of freedom over security.

Few people would argue for freedom in the first case of nuclear bomb ownership. The second case is more controversial, but it suffices for this example that there are people who argue for freedom on this. So they come down on different sides of the question when the circumstances are changed.

Reply to this opinion
User voted Freedom.
main reply
1 vote,
Aug 19, 2015

It doesn't depend. People aren't allowed to keep nuclear/chemical weapons because the weapons are a MASSIVE threat to the freedom of other people.

Challenge someone to answer your opinion:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
Invite your friend via email:
Share it: