Which is more valuable to you, freedom or safety?

[Anonymous]

I choose freedom, because with enough freedom I can make my self safe. To push safety over freedom is to push authoritarianism and fascism. I would never want that but most on the left are sll for stripping our rights Away for our safety.. Please note this question is not about abortion, any comments mentioning that will be removed without warning. This question is about the right to defend one's self and the right to speak freely.

Freedom

Safety

Updates

+1 y

I'm glad those of us with a brain voted freedom, because from freedom comes safety. Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. That is what has happened in the USA.

[nightdrot]

The question, though very wise and very well intended, is the fallacy of the false alternative. The irony is that freedom and safety are intimately connected. There cannot be one without the other and politics - at the most fundamental level - in a democracy is about the constant balancing and re-balancing of the two. As Disraeli said, "Finality is not in the vocabulary of politics."

To take the questioner's example. Yes, to emphasize safety too much is to open the gates to dictatorship. (To be fair, though, he misuses, as most Americans are won't to do, the terms "fascism" and "authoritarianism." Though that is a discussion for another day.) An omnipresent government that is moving to safe man from all the consequences of his choices will, in the hands of imperfect men, become in due course a threat to freedom and security it seeks to ensure.

Yet, here an irony. The questioner rightly says that he has the freedom to make himself safe. True. However, the problem is that if freedom is so rampant that he is not safe, then he is no longer free. He must divert all his energies to securing his safety and he no longer has a choice. Thus, ironically, in the absence of safety, the questioner is stripped of his freedom.

Thus did Edmund Burke, the 18th century British statesman and political philosopher write: "To make a government requires no great prudence. Settle the seat of power, teach obedience, and the work is done. To give freedom is still more easy. It is not necessary to guide; it only requires to let go the rein. But to form a free government; that is, to temper together these opposite elements of liberty and restraint in one work, requires much thought, deep reflection, a sagacious, powerful, and combining mind.”

To which he added: "The practical consequences of any political tenet go a great way in deciding upon its value. Political problems do not primarily concern truth or falsehood. They relate to good or evil. What in the result is likely to produce evil, is politically false: that which is productive of good, politically is true... I will not enter into the question of how much truth is preferable to peace. Perhaps truth is far better. But as we have scarcely ever the same certainty in the one that we have in the other, I would, unless the truth were evident indeed, hold fast to peace."

"In that case, Prudence (in all things a Virtue, in Politicks the first of Virtues) will lead us rather to acquiesce in some qualified plan that does not come up to the full perfection of the abstract Idea, than to push for the more perfect, which cannot be attain'd without tearing to pieces the whole contexture of the commonwealth, and creating an heart-ache in a thousand worthy bosoms. In that case combining the means and end, the less perfect is the more desirable"

So in the end, the question is, as I noted, the fallacy of the false alternative. Freedom absent safety is the illusion of freedom. Safety absent freedom is not safe. Rather it is to open the gates to the most brutal tyranny. Freedom and safety are two sides of the same coin and the positing of them at polar ends is a false dichotomy.

[MCheetah]

If you're a conservative or centrist, it's Freedom. If you're a liberal/"Progressive," it's "safety." With me, it'll always be freedom. I'm one of the sewer people eating rat burgers in Demolition Man. Hell, I'd be 'Edgar Friendly' myself.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/mjoSQ-lCA58

[Asker]

You and me both my friend. I just love how the left like to sell authoritarianism as safety when in reality it's about control.

[Sixgunsound]

When he was leaving the White House, Eisenhower talked about how safe prison is, but nobody is signing up for it voluntarily. Well, brainwashed and indoctrinated liberals seem to want the whole country to be a prison now. When will they realize the walls would be around them too! Or that the useful idiots were the first people Lenin Mao and Castro had shot?

[roaring20sman]

Based

[MCheetah]

@Asker
Thanks for the MHO.

[Varanus]

Question is meaningless without defining what you mean by "freedom." Freedom is an easy word to get people to rally behind, because it's vague enough that it could mean virtually anything, and different people interpret it wildly differently.

I feel like Americans define it as "having no legal restrictions whatsoever when it comes to buying firearms" combined with "being able to say absolutely anything, anywhere, without censorship or moderation, but only for people who agree with me."

I would define it as "easy access to healthy food, clean water, good shelter, medical care, education, bodily autonomy, social relationships, and the ability to contribute meaningfully to society to a level sufficient for self-actualization." e. g. you aren't free if your hierarchy of needs is not met, which includes safety.

[VanillaSalt]

Oh I like this you actually put a little thought into this… I wanna give you a different perspective to see…

Rights are the people in power telling you you can do something. You have the right to have a gun, to me, seem like I’m being told I can have one. Even more so if, whenever they feel like it, they can try and take that right or limit what kind of guns or how many I can have. If I thought taking all guns in the United States would end violent crimes I might agree to give up my guns. However we have borders with which to acquire illegal guns, we have criminals that don’t listen to gun laws, we have massive vehicles just as dangerous and sticks and stones and sharp pointy things and blunt heavy things and hands… If someone wants to hurt you you can stop them but only by being more prepared then them. They have a gun so you be a better shot. They have a knife so know how to fight.

Freedom of speech? Only if you don’t say something I disagree with. I’m tired of being banned from Facebook because people don’t like my opinion. The bitch ran over her cheating boyfriend and killed a pedestrian… Let her burn is an acceptable statement.

I wanna pose a few questions in regard to your examples… If 13 yr old children got together for a sex cult every Wednesday… should someone intervene? Who? The government? The parents?

Should a man that don’t work and don’t contribute to society be given the necessities you expect? If not then contributing to society is expected equally for men and women… So I pose a question. If women went on strike for a month… would the country shut down? No. Women makeup a small % of the essential jobs in America. If men went on strike for a day or 2 the country would lose millions. The power grid would fail, our emergency services and doctors, our transportation services… their mostly men. I don’t think we can pretend men and women equally contribute to society unless you fall back on making babies…

[VanillaSalt]

Should a man that’s dying of diabetes have his healthcare covered by the tax dollars of a healthy man? Should a woman’s abortion be covered and furthermore should she get welfare just cause she had a kid without a plan? Should we allow everyone to be gay at once even if it means the end of our race (worst case scenario)?

One last thing. If 30% of men end up hating women for how unfair laws and society are to men while codling women… do you think that’s going to help or hurt society? When society falls do you think women will still have the “saftey” they have today? Compared to the past women have it easier and safer then ever before in history. What happens when that goes away? We’re close. I don't know if you understand how close. Who ever woulda thought roe v wade would be over turned? There’s talks of banning abortion. Our “rights” are being taken daily…

[Varanus]

@VanillaSalt

I feel like you took a look at my critique of the question itself, and invented an entire political platform for me to be on, just so you could argue with it.

But sure, I'll bite. If you want actual political views, I'd say I disagree with the hyper-individualistic and often reductionist foundation of American culture. We live in a deeply interconnected society, and it's to our detriment that people ignore that or pretend it isn't so. All of us rely on the work of millions of other people, growing our food, making our clothes, maintaining our infrastructure, building houses, etc. None of us exist in isolation. I don't really care about rights or freedoms or laws or restrictions in and of themselves. I care about how they affect society as a whole. I care about raising the average standard of living so more people have a higher quality of life and are able to contribute back to the world to the best of their potential.

For example, people are the most pro-social when they feel safe and accepted by their community and feel they have opportunities to contribute meaningfully. People devolve into violence and infighting as deprivation (absolute or relative) increases. People contribute more when they feel like they can trust those around them. Crime, for instance, makes people less trusting of others as more people have to waste time looking over their shoulder and thinking about how to defend themselves rather than actually helping each other, and by extension, the larger society, succeed. In your dissertation about the importance of guns and violence, I can't help but feel like our society has _already_ failed you in some really fundamental ways. You sound like an abused animal that's constantly on high alert for the next person that's gonna try to hurt it, and that makes me really sad.

[Varanus]

Regarding all your questions, if we're talking about policy and law, the question that matters most at the end of the day is "what effects will this law or policy have on society as a whole over time?" For medical care, it may make sense to expend significant resources saving a young, intelligent person, not only because of the potential they possess, but also so people feel like they can trust the medical system to be there for them. It may also make sense to deny someone care if they're particularly useless, near the end of their natural life, and/or the care is extremely expensive. The key is to make sure people feel like the system is fair and they can trust it, and not so expensive that it reduces their quality of life more than it helps.

[VanillaSalt]

Holy shit. Lady your something else. I don't know where your from or your background but so few people here are able to think like you especially in the female population.

I can’t critique your last post at all because it’s so similar to how I feel. We have overvalued the individual over the group and are reaping the consequences now.

And as pathetic as it is I agree with your general view of me as in I am very aware of people and tend to overthink small things to find the lie hidden in their words. Between that and the recent focus on this division in the media trust is something I lack and its lead me to have a somewhat cynical view of society today. For instance a few years ago we started hearing stories of women raped in subways and trains and the men just ignored them and didn’t help. Here in America our society is a patriarchy for sure but at its core it’s gynocentric. Society here places all the value on women and saves none for most men. That being said if these people wouldn’t help the woman who’s supposed value is greater then mine what’s the odds they would help me.

The real problem isn’t me it’s the others that feel like me. I’m not a small portion of men by any means. When the young men of a society feel as though there’s no other options they usually got violent and that’s around the time society collapses.

I feel we’re starting to go in a positive direction with parents taking a bigger hand in their children’s education and the unfortunate but necessary involvement in government attacking abortion. The next step needs to be dealing with divorce and child laws. We need to empower the family unit so the next generation grows up learning from both fathers and mothers.

I am also thinking we need a… culling of sorts. Harsh to say but society today looks a lot like the ray utopia experiment… That should terrify everyone.

[Varanus]

@VanillaSalt

I'm a big fan of Systems theory. That's where a lot of this comes from.

We're at a difficult transition period in human society. We evolved in tribes numbering in the dozens or hundreds. Now we have 8 billion and can transmit information across the planet in milliseconds. Humans are generally more interested in bad news than good news, and we've reached a point where we have all the horrible things billions of people do on a daily basis filtered down into the worst of the worst and pumped into our heads constantly. It makes it feel like everything is crumbling around us. And we have the urge to find and protect our tribe, and seek advantage in ways that hurt the many for the benefit of a few. And from that perspective, historically, it was easy to have a defined role, and be among the best at something. Now, no matter how good we are, we have instant access to someone who's vastly superior at it, and that hurts our self-worth. All of that breaks down the trust that's the glue of our society.

If I may offer advice: filter your news so at least 50% of it is positive, educational, or otherwise helpful and uplifting. I had to cut out about 90-95% of the news I was exposed to in order to reach that point. When you see bad news, ask yourself "is there anything I can actually do about this?", or "does it make me a better person if I know this?," and if the answer is no, turn it off and dedicate that time to something positive you can do, that you have control over. Doing that gave me way more time to learn things, and greatly improved my mental health.

[VanillaSalt]

Didn’t know there was systems theory to explain what I found in my own. Helpful knowing that I’ll look into it thanks.

As for filtering news… I can see balancing news to be beneficial but my personality isn’t just due to news but what I’ve personally seen. Some of the dumbest shit you’d never think was real has happened to me. False accusation in jr high and a woman screaming at me something like 8 or 9 years ago in the store for holding the door for her… I’ve not seen them often but often enough to understand this shit actually happens.

Besides that I’ve got a chip on my shoulder lol. Went from hating everyone to just not giving a fuck. Arguable improvement. Still my empathy prevents me from passing a suffering person without feeling for them meanwhile my inner cynic refuses to put myself out there to help them… I need therapy haha. I’m well enough to see it though. What about all the people not or just not smart enough to? What about the real sociopaths that just don’t care at all and can’t empathize with others? Their the real danger.

[Varanus]

@VanillaSalt

Most of us could use some therapy. Having someone to open up to and talk through shit is critical for mental health. You should definitely reach out and talk with someone, I think it could help you move past some of that.

And sociopaths aren't the real danger. The real danger isn't others. The real danger is the apathy and hopelessness within ourselves. It's giving up. Hurting people hurt people. Becoming a better person takes consistent, concerted effort, and doing good for yourself, others, and the world as a whole is a choice you make each day. Reading your posts here, I see someone intelligent with a lot of potential, who cares, sitting on a knife-edge between wasting that potential and applying it to improve life for people around him.

I don't know if you're there yet, but it's easy to get overwhelmed with everything that needs attention in the world. Everyone thinks their cause is the most important. I say pick 2-3 things you deeply care about and want to improve, and pour your heart and soul into those, giving them the time needed to move the needle. Ignore the rest. Pick your battles. For me, it's climate change, education, and focusing on the long-term.

[VanillaSalt]

If I went to therapy my therapist would just become a suicide statistic lmao! Places like this and Facebook are my therapy. Proof is in my constant bans from Facebook hahaha! I share the knowledge I have from my point of view because… well you know you don’t know what you don’t know and another perspective brings understanding. So few people on here actually understand wth I’m talking about though. I can’t tell if I’m too smart for them to understand or too dumb to understand. Im smart enough to know there’s something wrong with society and people though…

I’ve actually had a good life despite having everything from terrible parents to worthless vices. Got a bit of a late start but if that and my cynicism is the worst I got out of it I’m lucky…

That being said I’m too ambitious for my own good. I have the highest of ambition for a man… family. Ironic considering the shit I post here and I do believe every word I post but hey… it’s human nature to want what we can’t have right.

I don’t see myself getting overwhelmed… I scare myself how calm I can be especially in situations of danger and violence. I don’t see apathy as a problem for me because the concerns there… More dangerous is the ability to turn off them feelings on a whim. I guess that’s not necessarily a sociopath but it’s just a cruel. I’ve stepped over a dead man a few years back 2 days before Christmas without a twinge of empathy for the guy. To be fair his last words were “go on then shoot me” so he literally asked for it but…

I wanna see a return to family values again. Growing up with a single mother as a guy you lack the male experience necessary and I can only assume the same can be said for women. I wanna see marriage and fathers placed on a higher pedestal then they are now. Until we value the men that sacrifice their bodies to keep society safe… we’re just gonna spiral.

[Vanidal]

@Varanus @VanillaSalt it was an enjoyable experience, reading your discussion.

[KelleyNice]

Regardless of this poll, 90 percent of people choose safety or promises of safety over freedom. Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. That is what has happened in the USA.

[Asker]

Holy crap a rational thinking young person. You're absolutely right

[Sixgunsound]

I’m surprised they’re still teaching Benjamin Franklin in US high schools.

[KelleyNice]

@Sixgunsound They probably don't but I'm home schooled.

[Sixgunsound]

My apologies I forgot.

[Sixgunsound]

That’s probably the reason you’re still capable of intelligent thought.

[Sixgunsound]

When I get my teaching certificate and switch to working days, my children will be homeschooled. And I will proudly be a public school teacher whose kids are not in public school. In the interest of fairness I am hardly the only public school teacher whose kids are not in public schools.

[KelleyNice]

@Sixgunsound Public school teachers are more informed than most parents about the indoctrination and lack of quality education in public school so it is understandable if some public school teachers home school their children.

[Ryfyle]

This is something a man would type.

[WhiteSteve]

I guess freedom, but the problem is that then I need to let other people operate that way, and I don’t really have any measure of faith in humanity to handle their own freedom properly in a way that I’d be comfortable with. I guess I feel like humanity has a choice to make: absolute freedom but no organized society and we live in the wild as animals; or well-organized society but people must be pretty heavily controlled, behaviorally. My trust levels of other humans are near 0%, we are an absolutely horrific species of animal.

[MrOracle]

Without freedom, safety isn't really possible. What you get instead is a police state, and that goes very bad every time.

You can compare areas of more freedom to areas of less freedom, and areas of more freedom are always safer. The problem is that politicians want to push anti-freedom laws that give the politicians the power, and they wait until there is a rare extreme event, then they manipulate people's feelings to get them to vote for "safety" by giving everyone's freedom to the politicians.

[Asker]

some of these people just dont get that.

[EmbraceThePain]

I chose freedom, but why? Well, I envision this question as deciding between living a life of saturated oversight, control, rules, and regulation versus living a life of independent decision-making and variety of alternatives or options. I could argue that most people would prefer a mix of the two in different circumstances within life, but if they could choose one or the other I'm certain most would choose freedom over safety. I think myself as well as most people would like the ability to be able to make decisions for ourselves in what we like, what we don't like, what's too dangerous, what's too safe, and more over the opposite option.

[lightbulb27]

I said freedom and I agree with @MCeetah analysis, I'd bet the left thinks different. I wonder if the emotional makeup of the people is the major differentiator. Some people/societies see more value in the group than the individual... e. g. china is trained this way.

I might change my mind if I were a person who became dependent upon others in society, but I doubt it.

[RangerBlue22]

Women have historically depended on others (particularly men) for safety for thousands of years. Now with the invention of birth control they don’t directly need men to protect and provide.

However these evolutionary impulses of being expected to be “taken care of” has many women looking to the government now as the paternal provider and protector (which is dangerous). So they choose socialism because they think it’s “safety”.

[mobiusforniner]

Why do i like driving my 55 year old car? Because it has a standard transmission, no airbags, only lap belts, grainy radio, roll down windows, lots of leg room and smells great on leaded gas... it feels like im operating the machine instead of having the machine operate me.

[Anonymous]

As an expat to the Netherlands from the US I completely agree. There are strict gun laws here but I also have access to cheap healthcare and government assistance and even though there are laws here I feel far more free than I did in America in a way because I get lots of vacation time, education and healthcare is cheaper and everywhere I go I feel safer. If things go wrong I also know I have a safety net. Plus I have all the benefits of a capitalist society and can go places even without a car. Personally I prefer the right to safely go about my day first and foremost and thankfully over 90% of the population here agrees with me on that.

[Opinion Owner]

Sorry this was supposed to be a reply to someone elses response. I don’t really agree with the post itself. The word “Freedom” in America has been turned into “I can do whatever I want even if it threatens the safety of someone else and potentially kills and harms other people”

[boggboss]

Healthy does of both at the end of the day true freedom comes with a lawless land whilst true safety takes away most freedoms both would be shit whilst equally needing both

[bolverk]

I'll provide my own safety.

Even as a Brit I can appreciate this quote from Benjamin Franklin;

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

[Asker]

I believe Winston Churchill said something similar. I could be wrong.

[NotTacocaT6969]

With freedom, I have the freedom to keep myself safe.


With authoritarian safety, They can take my freedoms away by claiming it’s for safety.

[RangerBlue22]

Very well said.

[Agape93]

Freedom. Freedom allows me to be safe on my own terms

[Asker]

Agreed.

[ThePartyGirl93]

I choose freedom over the fact that under Freedom you get so much more than just somebody who decides what is 'safe' or not under safety. Somebody's idea of Safety might not be that safe for another.

Under Freedom we can all be safe in our own ways and choose where, when, and how we practice it.

[Rania05]

Sounds stupid to say this, but if it's for me I'd choose safety because my life isn't mine alone. I have parents who'll take great blow in whatever harm that goes my way, I have a sister who would fight the world for me, friends that would cry for me and a future waiting for me to write. I wouldn't gamble my safety for freedom, because I'm not alone.

[NathanDavis]

many Americans do believe that a threat to their safety is the government "forcing" them to wear a mask...

so for me, since I actually live around cartels that have the actual freedom to whatever they want, I do consider my safety to be my number one priority

cartel's lawlessness are more of a threat than a simple mask... to me, anyway

[NathanDavis]

by the way, when I do say cartels... I am also including the governments themselves lol...

[DizzyDesii]

Everything contains a little bit of rules, censorship and restriction, so i dont feel as free as i should. I like being and feeling safe. It makes my life flow more easily. And no I’m not siding with republicans nor democrats

[exitseven]

Freedom. You can always take measures to ensure your safety but once you lose your Freedom it is hard to get it back

[Asker]

All these people who voted safety have never known struggle or having their rights stripped from them

[Anonymous]

Freedom for me and Frontier justice (Selbstjustiz).

The governments have used the security argument to invade our private lives, read our private messages and emails, spy on us and more unsolicited things. Electronics these days are double edged swords.

[MementoMori_]

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Benjamin Franklin

[RiseofArtemis]

Those who want safety over freedom deserve neither. You can create your own safety with freedom by not having the government watch every step you do.

[altaboy]

Short term probably safety, and long term probably freedom, but it would depend upon the threat and the circumstances. We should not accept a great compromise either way in the long term, because both are of vital importance, at least where I live.

[Midgetmcwidget]

Freedom because I have none, also I have no regard for my personal safety

[genericname85]

safety is always a tradeoff from freedom. i think either toal freedom or total safety would be horrible. so the question shouldn't be which you prefer but instead where do you draw the line? how much safety are you willing to sacrefice for your freedom or vice versa. i tend to gravitate more to the freedom side. i'll rather die doing what i love than live never doing what i love.

[MikeInHawaii]

Ben Franklin and Winston Churchill expressed similar beliefs that those who are willing to trade freedom for security deserve neither and lose both.

[888theGreat]

Freedom requires safety . You can't be safe if you are not free

[Asker]

I would say freedom generates safety, as in I have the freedom to make my self safe.

[Smashingdoozy]

They're kinda linked. You can't have one without the other.

[Sixgunsound]

This is, at its most basic, the philosophical divide between the left and right in the US.

[Chelsdope0]

But safety is freedom right? If we compare the U. S. to Saudi Arabia…

We can’t have true freedom without safety.. we would constantly be fighting for our freedom without safety.

I could be wrong😇

[rabbitzzz]

The people who drafted the first and second Amendments were wise. But don't think many youths reflects upon that anymore.

[TotallyAlmost]

Freedom without a doubt. I would like to say vote Democrat if you value freedom less than safety, but of course they are the party of lawlessness and violence, so it's a double disaster.

[Anonymous]

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. That is what has happened in the USA."

That is exactly right.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Freedom and lots of it. No point in living if you aren't free. It's like prison just outside of walls.

[Anonymous]

Without freedom no one is really safe in the long run.

[Dawty]

Freedom without safety is without value, safety without freedom is pointless.

[RangerBlue22]

Well said

[msc545]

A reasonable mixture of the two seems optimal.

[KrakenAttackin]

Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.

[purplepoppy]

Safety gives you freedom not the other way round. I can go for a drive in relative safety because other drivers are not free to drive however they please.

[Asker]

You say that until they start taking your rights away in favor of safety.

[exitseven]

@purplepoppy yes until somebody decides that you cannot drive your car anymore.

[KrakenAttackin]

@purplepoppy. Spoken like a true left wing European.

[Anonymous]

https://www.youtube.com/embed/u7XGbrSBGJU

[VanguardTitan]

Honestly a blance of both.
Freedom and safety and extremely vague concepts so can't just narrow it down like that.
So I'd choose a balance of both.

[Jackblue]

It is mostly about the correct balance so I don't feel comfortable saying either.

[FreyaRed]

Both... and I'm not willing to exchange one for another because if I give up one for the sake to keep other one I will lose both.

[Asker]

So you'd be OK with losing your right to own a weapon and defend your self in the name of safety?

[FreyaRed]

How far you lose freedom if you own a firearm? On the other hand in homogeneous societies with strong social cohesion are weapons not really necessary to keep the safety.

[Agagagagaga]

Honey you could live in Shangrila. Women are still going to get raped and killed. A gun usually helps. You can wish away violence all you want, it’s ridiculous and childish.

[FreyaRed]

@Agagagagaga Sweety ! Lack of dindunuffunism helps more than any firearm.

[Agagagagaga]

Say that as a man is forcing your legs apart behind a dumpster.

[FreyaRed]

@Agagagagaga You didn't get the point. IQ test failed.

[Ryfyle]

We are not free, The US is a Communist Slave State.

[Harbringer26]

Without safety there is no freedom. You want to know what people really need? Freedom from want.

[ShadezMcgee]

Freedom, no question.

[Anonymous]

Safety and you won't have any freedom if the right-wing loonies are voted in. Look at how many freedoms they want to remove, or is it you only read what you want to read?

[Asker]

Seeing as the left want to eliminate freedom of speech and the right to own a gun. Yeah both sides suck.

[joeldalton]

You need to stop driving. It’s safer.

[In_Trance]

Ironically, you can't have either in this life

[TroyDT]

An animal in a cage is safe.

[Iron_Man]

Freedom what is safety without freedom

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Freedom. Life's too short

[Kingofkings1992]

Freedom obviously

[rienna888]

Since I am an animal, i'd say freedom

[mrkdvsn]

Freedom and Liberty always

[Fuentes]

2A is my freedom

[joeldalton]

Freedom.

[BLP11520]

Freedom too

[Anonymous]

As an anarchist both

[MiseriaCantareAFI]

Safety

[despiteful]

Safety

[joeldalton]

It’s safer if you don’t drive or ride in a car. You must stop.

[despiteful]

@joeldalton cars can also be used to get people away from danger like fires or floods

[joeldalton]

Doesn’t matter. You want safety. No car. No stairs either. No swimming in a pool, or the ocean. And a strict 1500 calorie diet that I will dictate to you. No alcohol, weed, or caffeine.