Fundamentally we have to always fall back upon that freedom is more important than security.
Someone would say otherwise, who decides?
I say Jaan Hai toh jahaan hai.
I would rather see my parents' freedom curtailed than never see them at all.
It depends what is at state.
Let me raise the stake bit by bit.
So you're ok compromising on your security in order to have that extra bit of freedom.
How about your wife's security?
...or your Mom's security?
...or your son's and daughter's security?
...or the security of all of them combined going to a mall to enjoy a movie?
Point is, you, being a human and bound by the fallacies of love for the near and dear ones, will untilmately give up and say, "OK! I will risk my life but I will not risk the lives of those whom I love more than my life itself.".
...and then, my friend, you'll be just another human, fallible and immortal.
Famous American founding father Ben Franklin said:
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Security is a problem or failing of the government it has to resolve it by its own resources, without asking me to give up my freedom to wear a piece of clothing.
Benjamin Franklin was a luminary but he was no God.
God is the only one who knows all and sees all.
There's no telling that Ben wouldn't have changed his mind in keeping in view the times we live in.
Like I said, it's all a matter of where your point of submission lies, I will keep raising the stakes and soon there will be a point where you WILL yield.