The heart of the debate over liberty versus security in a world gripped by threats of terrorism lies in questions about how far we should deviate from the ideals of the enlightenment thinkers and whether we should leave our liberties in the hands of the state. While the threat of terrorism is very real and cannot be ignored, questions have emerged about whether terrorism can indeed be classified as a new threat that requires new methods and legal structures. Many argue that it is impossible to create complete man-made security and thus any attempts to subjugate personal liberties for the illusion of security are folly at best. While legislative change in response to terrorism has been widespread, many wonder whether more traditional methods and legal structures could effectively respond to the problem without placing the integrity of personal liberties at stake. This debate is underlined by developments in the surveillance field that make it far easier to encroach upon privacy and other rights for crime prevention and other criminal justice benefits. The author also discusses the emergence of a risk management paradigm, which can only be helped by the continued development of surveillance technology. Footnotes, references