&gt; <i>Ben Franklin&#x27;s observation that &quot;those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither&quot;</i><p>It is an <i>opinion</i>, not an <i>observation</i> (&#x27;deserve&#x27; in particular is not an observation). Just because someone famous said a thing doesn&#x27;t make it true, or even true-ish. If you want to be such a purist about Franklin&#x27;s comment, then abolish the police altogether; you&#x27;ll rapidly see that Franklin&#x27;s comment is not meant to be read in such a purist way. Or to put it another way: where do you draw the line with Franklin&#x27;s comment?<p>The article then goes on to talk about gun rights for some reason, with the usual canards thrown in, plus a bit of good ol&#x27; selective reporting: &quot;gun deaths are down by half in the past 25 years!&quot;, neatly ignoring that they&#x27;re measuring from the peak, not from the previous baseline. And the US homicide rate is still nearly four times higher than most other western democracies...