An interesting add-on to this is to poll about how one feels about Edward Snowden. The result is that the majority view him negatively. (http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/04/21/edward-snowde... and http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/edward-snowden-rasmussen-po...)
So unfortunately there is a pretty significant group of people that are okay with increased surveillance.
Note that from what I see, this divide doesn't appear to be traditional US liberal/conservative. In fact, if anything, the divide carries more of a generational rift, where older people are more okay with surveillance than younger people are. (The USA Today poll on Snowden mentions this, and there is also this: http://www.people-press.org/2013/07/26/few-see-adequate-limi...)
For those concerned with digital privacy and rights, I guess the question would be how to counter this narrative of fear that from my viewpoint drives these sort of opinions.
You would get an entirely different set of answers.
Or, if you for example told them that they were currently classified by religion and political leaning, and that they are loosely associated with the bombing of abortion clinics (but don't worry, lot's of people in Indiana are)
America has long been happy to have a more violent police force and higher rate of imprisonment than other countries so long as that violence is directed against nonwhite people. It seems people imagine that they'll be the priviliged ones behind the iron curtain; the neighbourhood informers.
(This is also why e.g. HOAs have such oppressive rules, they're aimed at eradicating "difference" and a form of soft-redlining)
No. Nobody wants to live in the iron curtain.
This is an absolute and total failure of leadership, from the Bush administration through the Obama administration. 16 years of inexcusable failure. (It probably goes back even further)
People with bombs have not created fear, politicians have.