Is Finland a 1984 Police state, or is there freedom?

[niceguy40]

I suppose though, that if you can get a full citizenship then you can live and work anywhere in the EU. That would offer an individual an awful lot of freedom. Correct me if I'm wrong?

[Rip]

Work and live, in that order, definitely yes.

[raskarhu]

There is one issue that harryc is unable to get past, and it has become the biggest obstacle in this discussion. He's unable to separate the moral judgement about an aspect of freedom vis-à-vis the mere logical argument of its existence in the United States. He seems to think
"U.S. has more freedom when it comes to gun ownership" = "I LOVE that you can get guns and shoot everyone!!"

While the first statement is indeed true, the second statement is a lot easier to attack. We're naturally drawn to creating scenarios in our heads that are easy. Easy to understand, easy to deal with. Which is precisely why this discussion is going nowhere. The parties involved are not on the same page.
To have an adult, serious discussion about these matters, one should be able to separate the emotional aspect from the logical/pragmatic one.

The U.S. has, undeniably, more freedoms when it comes gun ownership, some drug use, alcohol consumption, free market, corporation power, and dozens of other issues.
Does that mean I/we think all of the aspects of these issues are positive and good? No, of course not. It just means what it exactly says.
Meta arguments about these issues (racial tension, dangers of guns, corruption in politics, etc.) are all irrelevant.. for the simple reason that nobody has said those things are great! Nobody has said that the U.S. is the best! None of that!

Until one is able to understand the subtle differences and nuances in arguments, it's extremely difficult to have a focused discussion. This one, and many others on the internet and f2f.

With all due respect. But sometimes I really find that the words smug and self-satisfied really apply to you in the most absolute sense of the word. Listen to the arguments of others instead of turning the discussion into a semantic battle or a lecture on logic.

When you put forward that "The U.S. has, undeniably, more freedoms when it comes gun ownership, some drug use, alcohol consumption, free market, corporation power, and dozens of other issues." then it is perfectly possible to disagree with that utterance and have valid arguments to oppose the level of truth of such proposition, e.g. by questioning the very definition of freedom for starters. Just saying.

With regard to the OP is Finland a police state. No.