Feds going too far.... by criminalizing everyone

[Ceicei]

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]

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

 

[shesulsa]

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

.

 

[Ceicei]

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]

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]

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

 

[Ceicei]

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]

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]

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

 

[Sukerkin]

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]

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]

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
so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live
without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law abiding citizens?
What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can
neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you
create a nation of law breakers - and then you cash in on guilt..."

- Ayn Rand (1905-1982), spoken by Dr. Floyd Ferris in Atlas Shrugged, 1957

 

[arnisador]

Sheesh! Orchids.

 

[Bruno@MT]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

2nd Amendment.

 

[KELLYG]

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.