Should governments implement security measures that limit personal freedom in order to prevent terrorist attacks?

You think the haven't already

CCTV, facial recognition, and DNA profiling

Our (USA) government's just authority to limit our personal freedom is derived from compelling interest. Compel means FORCE. If people's personal rights are being violated then government MUST act, is COMPELLED to act to protect those personal rights. If there is a clear and direct threat to our national security then government MUST act, is COMPELLED to act to protect our national security.

And where there is no compelling interest, government must BUTT OUT of our personal lives.

They have and do

Of course. That is one of the functions of government.

They already do, such as airport baggage and background checks and border screening. Like so many things it is not about all or none but how much and why. It's a finely tuned balance as to what is a reasonable violation of one's privacy and what is not, and what is the efficacy of that.

Well aren't we a few decades late to this the conversation? The Should Boat hasn't so much already left port as it has sailed, circumnavigated the globe, and returned to port laden with exotic spice.

Life without Freedom is MEANINGLESS.

Give me Liberty, or give me Death.

So ... no. If we have to surrender personal freedoms to defend ourselves against terrorists, they have already won.

Such as what?

"You can't have 100% security and 100% privacy" -barack obama

With the way things are going, conservatives would have us living in a complete surveillance state pretty soon out of fear and recklessness

Lol leftists aren't the ones scared of musIims, bIacks, immigrants, etc. We've already seen Republican controlled-congresses pass things like the Patriot Act which led Democrats to pass things like the Freedom Act