The events during and following last week’s Boston Marathon stirred in us a wide range of emotions. We felt great pride as we watched brave men and women working to save friends, family members, and complete strangers. We felt sorrow as we learned of our fallen countrymen and heroes. We felt fear and uncertainty as we wondered what was next. Some even felt an anger they hadn’t experienced since September 11, 2001. But at the end of the week, we felt relief and a sense of justice as the ordeal drew to a close and the suspects were captured or killed. It was a week that showed a lot of what’s right about America.
Unfortunately, it’s was also a week that showed some of the things that are wrong with our country. Benjamin Franklin’s famous quote, now inscribed on the Statue of Liberty’s pedestal, reminds us, “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Pundits and historians quibble about the exact verbiage and meaning of Franklin’s words, but we know a few things for certain: the founding fathers deeply cherished liberty and their loathing of tyranny was equally deep. They feared the creeping nature of government, which erodes individual rights and freedoms. And I think it’s safe to assume they would have been shocked and disturbed by how the week in Boston ended.
Regardless of exactly what words Franklin said, clearly freedom and safety exist in balance. They often occupy opposite ends of a spectrum. That’s why the events of Friday, April 19th (the 238th anniversary of Paul Revere’s midnight ride) were unsettling to say the least. The citizens of Boston and Watertown were essentially under house arrest, or “secure in place” as it is euphemistically called. As the search for the surviving suspect of the Boston Marathon bombing continued, the city of Watertown was occupied by a heavy military and police presence. Law enforcement and National Guard troops searched houses for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Certainly there are those who said that officers were respectful and the search was voluntary. But there is also video and anecdotal evidence to the contrary. Anyway, would you really feel free to decline a “voluntary” search if you answered the front door to be greeted by SWAT and military personnel wielding assault rifles? Even if there were less than 100 such incidents, less than 10, or even just one, such behavior is unacceptable and illegal. Perhaps most importantly, it’s completely Un-American. The people of Watertown are U.S. citizens, and they are entitled to the protections of our Constitution, even if that means a suspect is on the run a little longer.
There are a couple of facts to keep in mind as we look back on the pursuit of the Tsarnaev brothers: 1) footage from security cameras of private businesses led to the identification of the suspects, and 2) a tip from a citizen, not random home searches by armed government agents, led to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s capture. Despite those realities, we already hear politicians clamoring for more government surveillance of city streets. And, not surprisingly, we hear calls from those in power that Tsarnaev be labeled an “enemy combatant,” allowing him to be stripped of his rights and liberties in the name of making us safer. But isn’t the Constitution strong enough to protect the rights of the accused and allow us to apprehend, prosecute, and convict offenders? It was certainly adequate to both tasks when Timothy McVeigh attacked the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. It was strong enough to protect and convict Yousef, Ismoil, Abouhalima, Salameh, Ayyad, and Ajaj for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. And it was even strong enough to allow prosecution of The Weathermen for a string of terrorist attacks in the 1960s and 1970s, while still guaranteeing their 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment rights.
Yes, terrorism is horrible. It’s scary and it shakes us to the core. That’s its purpose: to affect us so deeply that it changes the way we live, that it changes who we are. And that’s exactly what it did in Massachusetts last week. The United States of America must be stronger than that. We must show that rule of law prevails, that we honor the rights of all our citizens, no matter how detestable they or their actions may be. Adhering to our own Constitution and our own laws is what makes us different, dare I say better, than so much of the world. When any one American loses his basic rights because he crossed a line of abhorrence, because he did something “too evil,” then we are all a little less free. And paradoxically, when we agree to become less free, we also become less safe.
We will do well to remember that terrorists the world over are responsible for far fewer murders than oppressive governments. Certainly the United States government is nothing like those of China or Syria or so many other countries where the rights of the accused are far more “flexible.” Americans are blessed to have a 237-year history in which the vast majority of our soldiers and law enforcement have been brave, noble, and committed to our freedom. But we are not guaranteed that future unless we are constantly vigilant over our rights and liberties. How many Soviet citizens scoffed, “It can never happen here,” later to find themselves dying in the Gulags?