# Feds going too far....  by criminalizing everyone



## Ceicei (Oct 5, 2009)

This really burns me up!  :rpo:  

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/05/criminalizing-everyone/

What would you do if this happens to you?

- Ceicei


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Oct 5, 2009)

Nothing I am prepared to publicly post, that much is certain.


----------



## shesulsa (Oct 5, 2009)

Andy Moynihan said:


> Nothing I am prepared to publicly post, that much is certain.


.


----------



## Ceicei (Oct 5, 2009)

Andy Moynihan said:


> Nothing I am prepared to publicly post, that much is certain.



Ah, let's not "invite" the Feds....  If I disappear, you know why.

- Ceicei


----------



## shesulsa (Oct 5, 2009)

This is the kind of problem that has gone so far that one has to wonder just how far the public must go to change the matter?  

This would take an aggressive campaign which would take a lot of money.  How do we do that?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 5, 2009)

You can't out spend a group that prints on demand.


----------



## Ceicei (Oct 5, 2009)

shesulsa said:


> This is the kind of problem that has gone so far that one has to wonder just how far the public must go to change the matter?
> 
> This would take an aggressive campaign which would take a lot of money.  How do we do that?



You know, there has been a movement lately with some States (Montana and Tennessee passed this and about six other States introduced legislation) claiming their own State rights to regulate some things  (such as the manufacture and sales of firearms within their States) and do not want any interference from the Federal government.  I believe they call this the Firearms Freedom Act (or similar) based on the premises of the Second, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments.

If these Acts turn out to be successful in reducing the influence/powers of the Federal government, perhaps we could extend this further to cover other principles beside firearms?

- Ceicei


----------



## celtic_crippler (Oct 5, 2009)

Everything has a breaking point. 

This simple fact is evident throughout history.\

Pretending this fact does not exist will not keep the obvious from occuring yet again.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 5, 2009)

10th Amendment rule.
http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 5, 2009)

I am astounded in one way that such things could come to pass and yet oh-so-cynically not surprised in another.

I know that it has largely been what are derisorily called the Tin-Hat-Brigade that have been trumpeting the infringements of liberties that have been growing apace in the States but I do think that there is a real problem growing in the heart of democracies that needs to be addressed.

Similar, tho maybe not so extreme, things are sprouting over here in Britain too, where over-regulation of legal activities is turning many into unwitting criminals and where that self-same legislation is tying the hands of judges and magistrates so that they are no longer able to use their common-law sensibilities to make common-sense rulings.

The thread title says it very succinctly - this type of massively convoluted and detailed legislating just serves to make unwitting criminals out of the law-abiding (or would be if they understood what the law was) majority.

Simultaneously it does nothing to inhibit those of true criminal intent.


----------



## grydth (Oct 5, 2009)

The thread's general proposition is true, and goes for civil law as well as criminal law, and for state/local laws as well as federal law.

There are, simply, way too many laws.... especially for the so-called "Land of the Free". In fact, things have gotten to a point where even experienced lawyers and judges sometimes can't figure out "what the law is".

Plainly put, the government gets way too involved with intruding into the lives of ordinary citizens.... while being overly lenient with genuinely evil individuals.... such as letting violent felons out on parole.

But blame the Fish & Wildlife Service? The Federal Judge? No.... blame yourselves, folks. All of the screeches over the last generation of "there ought to be a law" and "the government should ban..." have come home to roost. Authored by dumbass politicians who don't even read the bills before voting.... who you elected.......or whom you suffered to be elected by sitting home on your fat asses watching American Idol instead of voting.

You all have the government you deserve.... and if it looks more like the British tyranny the Founders rose up against rather than what they sought to give us.....well, you can find the guilty party in the bathroom, over the sink.

Oh, and methinks there likely was much more to that orchid case than the convicts are now letting on....


----------



## Ceicei (Oct 5, 2009)

This reminds me of a quote sent to me the other day from a friend. I never read the book; however, the excerpt is something I would like to share with you.  



> "Did you really think we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr.
> Ferris. "We want them broken...There's no way to rule innocent men. The
> only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
> Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares
> ...


----------



## arnisador (Oct 5, 2009)

Sheesh! Orchids.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Oct 6, 2009)

grydth said:


> But blame the Fish & Wildlife Service? The Federal Judge? No.... blame yourselves, folks. All of the screeches over the last generation of "there ought to be a law" and "the government should ban..." have come home to roost. Authored by dumbass politicians who don't even read the bills before voting.... who you elected.......or whom you suffered to be elected by sitting home on your fat asses watching American Idol instead of voting.
> 
> You all have the government you deserve.... and if it looks more like the British tyranny the Founders rose up against rather than what they sought to give us.....well, you can find the guilty party in the bathroom, over the sink.



That's the thing, isn't it. As much as you like to complain about your government: you're the one who put it there.

If you don't like it, start a new, local party, and be better than the current crop of politicians. Or work with local politicians you trust and try to get something done. But do something. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils is not going to work.

YOU enable the local, state and federal government. if YOU don't change it, then compaining on an internet forum is not going to help any. If Jefferson, Washington and the rest of that lot had stuck to sitting on their patio and just complaining, they wouldn't have made a difference. In this case, picking up guns is not going to help. You have to get people to care about politics; to vote for politicians with integrity instead of the gladhanders who tell you what you want to hear; to accept compromise and respecting the other guy's point of view.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 6, 2009)

British tyranny? When did that happen? 

I know we had a colony full of religious malcontents who treasonously refused to pay the perfectly fair and just dues levied upon them by the body to whom they owed loyalty.

They then went on to collaborate with the mortal enemy of their mother country in a violent terrorist assault equisitely timed to make their ramshackle colony not economically worth the fight to keep it under the wing of the sovereign.

Interesting thing, history, isn't it :lol:?


----------



## JDenver (Oct 6, 2009)

Not to be devil's advocate, but isn't this exactly the type of power Americans granted their law enforcement agencies post 9/11?  In hindsight, and with actual application, maybe it's not looking like such a great idea anymore?


----------



## Em MacIntosh (Oct 6, 2009)

It tears off the arm to remove a splinter.  What I can't understand is the mindspace of those who enforce these things.  There's no difference of degree.  Send the paramedics to fight off the armed robber while the swat team goes to babysit some flowers, y'know, in case granpa has a rider mower.


----------



## Xinglu (Oct 6, 2009)

Ceicei said:


> You know, there has been a movement lately with some States (Montana and Tennessee passed this and about six other States introduced legislation) claiming their own State rights to regulate some things  (such as the manufacture and sales of firearms within their States) and do not want any interference from the Federal government.  I believe they call this the Firearms Freedom Act (or similar) based on the premises of the Second, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments.





Bruno@MT said:


> That's the thing, isn't it. As much as you like to complain about your government: you're the one who put it there.
> 
> YOU enable the local, state and federal government. if YOU don't change it, then compaining on an internet forum is not going to help any. If Jefferson, Washington and the rest of that lot had stuck to sitting on their patio and just complaining, they wouldn't have made a difference. In this case, picking up guns is not going to help. You have to get people to care about politics; to vote for politicians with integrity instead of the gladhanders who tell you what you want to hear; to accept compromise and respecting the other guy's point of view.



Yup.  The last time the states attempted to assert their rights, Lincoln told them to eff off, then they attempted their legal right of succession, and once again Lincoln established that the states really have no rights by picking up arms and forcefully reuniting the states to the union.

Which means we either overthrow our current government  and re establish a new one to suit our needs as our founding fathers did, or we attempt to change it via our votes and hope we can trust the people we elect.  We the people also have the right to impeach our leaders too - the problem is, we have given up most of our rights and are ignorant to the rest of them.

Furthermore, the patriot act seems to have created a loophole that circumvents almost all of our rights.  This my the people we have elected and they did so without any penalty from we the people.

So what does that leave us with?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 6, 2009)

2nd Amendment.


----------



## KELLYG (Oct 6, 2009)

Contrary to popular belief.  The only freedom you have is the freedom that your goverment allows you to have! 

Mrs. Norris testified before the House Judiciary subcommittee on crime this summer. The hearing's topic: the rapid and dangerous expansion of federal criminal law, an expansion that is often unprincipled and highly partisan.  Lesson learned do not protest against expansion of federal criminal law.

Evertson, a small-time entrepreneur and inventor, faced two separate federal prosecutions stemming from his work trying to develop clean-energy fuel cells.  Lesson learned  do not try to make clean energy (non fossil fuel) cells.


----------



## Xinglu (Oct 6, 2009)

KELLYG said:


> Contrary to popular belief.  The only freedom you have is the freedom that your goverment allows you to have!



This is not in line with what the founding fathers had in mind with the formation of our government.


----------



## Xinglu (Oct 6, 2009)

Bob Hubbard said:


> 2nd Amendment.



But we don't REALLY have that.  We have an abridged version.


----------



## KELLYG (Oct 6, 2009)

"This is not in line with what the founding fathers had in mind with the formation of our government"

Xinglu, 

I agree with you 100% but the government has slowly been eroding what this country was founded on every since it was started.   The end result is what we have today. Grannies and Grandpas being thrown in the pen for having a hobby or having the nerve to speak out against the government.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 6, 2009)

JDenver said:


> Not to be devil's advocate, but isn't this exactly the type of power Americans granted their law enforcement agencies post 9/11?  In hindsight, and with actual application, maybe it's not looking like such a great idea anymore?



Of course what do Orchids have to do with national security?  But your point is still valid.

During the Roman Empire, the emperors took to have laws printed high on columns........so that the people could not read them or know what was illegal.  That way the emperor's could apply the laws to whomever they saw fit, since virtually anyone could violate a written law they had no way of knowing.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 6, 2009)

KELLYG said:


> Contrary to popular belief.  The only freedom you have is the freedom that your goverment allows you to have!
> 
> Mrs. Norris testified before the House Judiciary subcommittee on crime this summer. The hearing's topic: the rapid and dangerous expansion of federal criminal law, an expansion that is often unprincipled and highly partisan.  Lesson learned do not protest against expansion of federal criminal law.
> 
> Evertson, a small-time entrepreneur and inventor, faced two separate federal prosecutions stemming from his work trying to develop clean-energy fuel cells.  Lesson learned  do not try to make clean energy (non fossil fuel) cells.



That's not entirely true.......the only freedom you have is what you have the power to TAKE!  What the government GIVES you are 'privileges'. 

All liberty AND despotism begins at the end of a sword......the difference is who is holding the sword.



> "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. &#8212; That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, &#8212; That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."


----------



## KELLYG (Oct 6, 2009)

sgtmac_46

I agree with your statement 100%.  It seems to me with the examples posted that these people were unable to defend themselves with their sword.  Who is protecting the people that can not protect themselves?  Who do you call when the government has ill will against you and wants you punished?  Jezz the woman was growing orchids for Pete's sake.


----------



## SensibleManiac (Oct 6, 2009)

Should we be surprised that the second guy was thrown in jail for working on clean energy fuel cells?


----------



## cdunn (Oct 6, 2009)

The gentleman.. and I use that word in the loosest of terms... that was working on the fuel cells was jailed for shipping ten tons of material which will autoignite on contact with moisture without following the established (and woefully inadequate) safety procedures and declarations. His truck, frankly, could have done enough damage to make Osama bin Laden drool in envy. 

Working on an alternate fuel cell does not give you the right to accidently spray poison and fire all over the landscape.


----------



## MA-Caver (Oct 6, 2009)

Was talking with a friend of mine today during a leisurely 3 mile hike and basically we're working our way to socialism whether we like it or not... So whatever it is that you may or may not be doing... it's going to get examined closely.
Told him that eventually he and I would need a permit for doing what we are doing at that moment... hiking along a trail alongside a mountain. We'll have to explain everything that we plan on doing and describe everything that we are bringing with us and explain the purpose of the hike.  

We'll then have to wait 4-6 weeks to get the permit and go on the date/time specified and return at a specified date/time. 

Hello Comrades what a brave new world we live in. 


> _If the federal government has the exclusive right to judge the extent of its own powers, warned the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions authors (James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, respectively), it will continue to grow  regardless of elections, the separation of powers, and other much-touted limits on government power._
> *Thomas E. Woods*





> The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.
> 
> 
> Benjamin Dislaeli  English Statesman 1844


----------



## Xinglu (Oct 6, 2009)

KELLYG said:


> sgtmac_46
> 
> I agree with your statement 100%.  It seems to me with the examples posted that these people were unable to defend themselves with their sword.  Who is protecting the people that can not protect themselves?  Who do you call when the government has ill will against you and wants you punished?  Jezz the woman was growing orchids for Pete's sake.



The thing is, if he did defend himself in such a way, he and his wife would be dead.  However, if the entire town he lived in, stood up to the feds there would be little they could do about it.

Individuals who stand up and fight will get nothing done except to be executed and/or jailed.  What is needed is organized groups of people to stand up and fight.  But that would no doubt be mislabeled as domestic terrorism...


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 6, 2009)

I really don't mean this to come across as horrid or argumentative for the sake of it but you chaps have really got to to learn the difference between Socialism and despotic Communism.

I know that the propoganda that was fed to you during the Cold War is why the term is skewed in your minds but that is no excuse not to learn what the terms mean after the fact.

It's a small point but an annoying one to those handful of us on this site who actually live in a socialist state and quite like it.


----------



## grydth (Oct 6, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> British tyranny? When did that happen?
> 
> I know we had a colony full of religious malcontents who treasonously refused to pay the perfectly fair and just dues levied upon them by the body to whom they owed loyalty.
> 
> ...



Oh, that tic in the "L" column for wars must still smart so, even after 200 years.

Fortunately, you learned from the experience, and now seek to impose that soul stifling brand of socialism only upon yourselves.

Unfortunately, we learned from you and have now done this to ourselves, "erected a multitude of new Offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."

So, it can be readily seen that all of our troubles originated in the UK!


----------



## crushing (Oct 6, 2009)

JDenver said:


> Not to be devil's advocate, but isn't this exactly the type of power Americans granted their law enforcement agencies post 9/11?  In hindsight, and with actual application, maybe it's not looking like such a great idea anymore?



It has been much more gradual and over a longer term than that.  It started in the 1930s for the good of all and really seemed to accelerate in the mid to late 1990s and again in 2001.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Oct 6, 2009)

MA-Caver said:


> Was talking with a friend of mine today during a leisurely 3 mile hike and basically we're working our way to socialism whether we like it or not... So whatever it is that you may or may not be doing... it's going to get examined closely.
> Told him that eventually he and I would need a permit for doing what we are doing at that moment... hiking along a trail alongside a mountain. We'll have to explain everything that we plan on doing and describe everything that we are bringing with us and explain the purpose of the hike.
> 
> We'll then have to wait 4-6 weeks to get the permit and go on the date/time specified and return at a specified date/time.
> ...


 
I'm just glad that one way or another, I won't live to see it.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 6, 2009)

grydth said:


> Oh, that tic in the "L" column for wars must still smart so, even after 200 years.


 
Not really - only when former colonists rejoice overmuch in a rebellion they did not win.  The French won your independance for you and then stiffed you (we could have told you that would happen).



grydth said:


> Fortunately, you learned from the experience, and now seek to impose that soul stifling brand of socialism only upon yourselves.


  Oh you mean that Parliamentary Democracy thingy that most of the world that considers itself 'free' copies?



grydth said:


> Unfortunately, we learned from you and have now done this to ourselves, "erected a multitude of new Offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."


  Oh so true - the dry rot that is bureaucracy and internal empire building is a universal 



grydth said:


> So, it can be readily seen that all of our troubles originated in the UK!


  Well of course they did - you *are* English after all.

{can't think of a smiley that rightly says that this is in fun but that there is a core of truth in all of it}.


----------



## grydth (Oct 6, 2009)

Yes, I can imagine having the French collect an "assist" must be doubly humbling.... I mean, who loses wars to the French?

Even at my most contentious and uncivil, I have never called any opponent.... "English" !!!

Though fun, .... we do digress......


----------



## grydth (Oct 6, 2009)

P. S.

You know you've won a moral and intellectual victory when the other fellow has to drop the "E Bomb".......


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 6, 2009)

Well, if we're going to tangent about that little dispute back in the 1700's, it wasn't really the English's butts that got kicked, but lots of hired Germans.  Actually, it was WW2, the Prequel, with the same players, just different positions. Actually my biggest complaint with England is Earl Grey tea, but that's a whole nother argument. 


As to the topic of people being criminalized, one only has to look at the increasing number of complaints of people being harassed over taking photographs or video taping cops and rent-a-cops actions, with growing numbers of people told incorrectly that it's illegal and terroristic.  2 weeks after a local photographers meetup spent an entire evening photographing the Peace Bridge in WNY, a lone photographer was chased away by US Border patrol, who cited 9/11. Bridge is lit up like mad at night in a cool display.  People ask "what's the harm in complying with a cops unlawful order?". Point out the obvious and you're a cop hater.  

People are tense, the cops are tense, and abuses are happening. Short cuts are being taken, and people are getting hurt, lives destroyed and trust in law enforcement is eroding. This creates a vicious cycle that takes both sides to break. Cops need to be sure they have their facts straight and deal with the few bad cops who need to be drumed out. They have to stop assuming that everyone is a bad guy, and the public needs to know that despite a few jerks, the majority of cops are good people who do a hard thankless job every day not knowing if today they go home in a bag.

All of us need to hold our elected officials accountable, and start calling them on their BS, and remind them that they either work for US or they can clean out their desks and work for a living like the rest of us.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Oct 6, 2009)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Well, if we're going to tangent about that little dispute back in the 1700's, it wasn't really the English's butts that got kicked, but lots of hired Germans. Actually, it was WW2, the Prequel, with the same players, just different positions. Actually my biggest complaint with England is Earl Grey tea, but that's a whole nother argument.
> 
> 
> As to the topic of people being criminalized, one only has to look at the increasing number of complaints of people being harassed over taking photographs or video taping cops and rent-a-cops actions, with growing numbers of people told incorrectly that it's illegal and terroristic. 2 weeks after a local photographers meetup spent an entire evening photographing the Peace Bridge in WNY, a lone photographer was chased away by US Border patrol, who cited 9/11. Bridge is lit up like mad at night in a cool display. People ask "what's the harm in complying with a cops unlawful order?". Point out the obvious and you're a cop hater.
> ...


 
All completely correct in theory, and I should like to endeavor to do so for as long as it may yet matter, and yet I remain largely convinced that we are in the final quarter of the human game and time is running out.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Oct 7, 2009)

Ceicei said:


> This really burns me up! :rpo:
> 
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/05/criminalizing-everyone/
> 
> ...


One of the many reasons that I favor a small, limited federal government.  

Daniel


----------



## cdunn (Oct 9, 2009)

Took a quick look at Mr. Norris as well - Much like Mr. Evertson's case, the reporter is rather severely under-reporting the case in order to lead you around by the nose. The Orchids in question are;
A: an endangered species protected by international treaty.
B: worth over $45,000. (A bit over $260 a dozen.)

So, the "gentleman" in question was selling flowers that are illegal to harvest unless they come from one of three licensed breeders, (which they did, but he had no proof of), on top of evasion of a lawful tax duty. Both of which, I might add, are consequences of powers specifically mentioned by the constitution.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 10, 2009)

KELLYG said:


> sgtmac_46
> 
> I agree with your statement 100%.  It seems to me with the examples posted that these people were unable to defend themselves with their sword.  Who is protecting the people that can not protect themselves?  Who do you call when the government has ill will against you and wants you punished?  Jezz the woman was growing orchids for Pete's sake.




.......'We the People'........


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 10, 2009)

MA-Caver said:


> Was talking with a friend of mine today during a leisurely 3 mile hike and basically we're working our way to socialism whether we like it or not... So whatever it is that you may or may not be doing... it's going to get examined closely.
> Told him that eventually he and I would need a permit for doing what we are doing at that moment... hiking along a trail alongside a mountain. We'll have to explain everything that we plan on doing and describe everything that we are bringing with us and explain the purpose of the hike.
> 
> We'll then have to wait 4-6 weeks to get the permit and go on the date/time specified and return at a specified date/time.
> ...



It truly is a 'Brave New World'........


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 10, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> I really don't mean this to come across as horrid or argumentative for the sake of it but you chaps have really got to to learn the difference between Socialism and despotic Communism.
> 
> I know that the propoganda that was fed to you during the Cold War is why the term is skewed in your minds but that is no excuse not to learn what the terms mean after the fact.
> 
> It's a small point but an annoying one to those handful of us on this site who actually live in a socialist state and quite like it.



"The goal of socialism is communism" -Vladimir I. Lenin


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 10, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> Well of course they did - you *are* English after all.
> 
> {can't think of a smiley that rightly says that this is in fun but that there is a core of truth in all of it}.


 Actually many of us are (and many of the revolutionaries were) Scots-Irish.......which may go a long way in explaining the 'pleasure' at the image of shooting redcoats.  

Of particular note, Andrew Jackson was Scots-Irish, and took a particular zeal in his pursuit of the British.  

In addition, of further note is that the Battle of Kings Mountain, the turning point of the Revolutionary War, and much of the southern theater of the Revolutionary War was largely fought by Scots-Irish settlers.......they are the ones who history records as not having fought fair, and instead fought a Guerilla war that had a huge hand in causing the British to lose the war.

If the British are curious about some of the glee we take in the Revolution, it does help to remember that many Americans are of Scots-Irish decent, not purely English.


----------



## Hudson69 (Dec 17, 2009)

Just wait until they outlaw the practice and study of the martial arts due to their being "dangerous" skills that could be used to hurt someone.  At some point a government not checked will outlaw everything, including the freedom of thought.

We live in the greatest country the world has ever known; lets strive to keep it that way; vote.


----------

