I disagree with that policy, under Bush when it was instituted or any other administration. But as stated under certain circumstances, it is legal.
Oh I see our constitutional protected rights can be eliminated legally because the government says so, geesh I always thought those were our natural rights just for being alive, silly me.
This people and the attitudes like Boxes is why we have tyranny
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
You post about "TYRANNY"??? Ask the pre K kids at the Oklahoma city bombing about "TYRANNY"!
Ask their parents if those 3, 4 and 5 year old kids died fighting TYRANNY.
The proper word here is Treason! treason: the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign. "WE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SO THAT WE CAN GO DUCK HUNTING..." "WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS IN ORDER TO SHOOT OUR OWN POLITICIANS, TO SHOOT THE POLICE, TO SHOOT YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, YOUR PRESIDENT, YOUR CONGRESSMAN, YOUR SENATORS."
There you go again, that is a pretty extreme response. Oklahoma City was mass murder by a crazy man. The liberty movement is a defined philosophical movement, a peaceful REVOLUTION through the ballot box. The Americans right to bear arms is for when the elite in power do not allow for democratic process to work and bring about the desired revolution of the governed. If and when the government power structure use the powers of the state to crush the peaceful revolutionary dissent, the 2nd amendment gives the peaceful revolutionaries a chance to protect themselves.
revolution an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.
LOL...Yeah, you "taught me".hahahahahahaha. It wasn't a slippery slope, it was an inference.
No you seem to have learned nothing.
Inference and the slippery slope are two different things.
Your post:
You sound like an extremist box. Extremist like you ALWAYS bring things to the extreme.
1. Sounds like box can't wait until the practice of political prisoners begins so people like me and Henry that publicly question the government are locked up. (The Set Up) 2. The next step box will be cheering for is the banning of books that speak against the state. (The Next Step) 3.Those books will be called Domestic Terrorist 'how to' books. (the eventual outcome) Public Dissent = Domestic Terrorist = Enemy of the State
IF you do x the "next thing" you will accept y = slippery slope.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
There you go again, that is a pretty extreme response. Oklahoma City was mass murder by a crazy man. The liberty movement is a defined philosophical movement, a peaceful REVOLUTION through the ballot box. The Americans right to bear arms is for when the elite in power do not allow for democratic process to work and bring about the desired revolution of the governed. If and when the government power structure use the powers of the state to crush the peaceful revolutionary dissent, the 2nd amendment gives the peaceful revolutionaries a chance to protect themselves.
YUP! I am an American citizen... I determine that my constitutional rights guarantee that I don't need a drivers license to drive a car. Since I determined that drivers licenses are illegal under the constitution... I can take up arms against a law enforcement official of the govt who attempts to take away my RIGHT.
Works every time!!!
Give me liberty or give me death... or in this case... it's the poor cop just doing his job that got DEATH. How lame can ya get.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Inference and the slippery slope are two different things.
Your post:
You sound like an extremist box. Extremist like you ALWAYS bring things to the extreme.
1. Sounds like box can't wait until the practice of political prisoners begins so people like me and Henry that publicly question the government are locked up. (The Set Up) 2. The next step box will be cheering for is the banning of books that speak against the state. (The Next Step) 3.Those books will be called Domestic Terrorist 'how to' books. (the eventual outcome) Public Dissent = Domestic Terrorist = Enemy of the State
IF you do x the "next thing" you will accept y = slippery slope.
It wasn't an argument, it wasn't a premise followed by a conclusion - it was a statement.
INFERENCE a : the act of passing from one proposition, statement, or judgment considered as true to another whose truth is believed to follow from that of the former
It wasn't an argument, it wasn't a premise followed by a conclusion - it was a statement.
INFERENCE a : the act of passing from one proposition, statement, or judgment considered as true to another whose truth is believed to follow from that of the former
RIGHT. THE first statement has to be correct for the resulting conclusion of the second to be correct.
Since 1 is incorrect, (Sounds like box can't wait until the practice of political prisoners begins) you cannot infer the resulting conclusion of 2.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
. or in this case... it's the poor cop just doing his job that got DEATH.
Historically, that is the moral excuse for a lot of immoral and inhumane behavior - "I was just following orders", "I was just doing my job". If you collect a paycheck from the state and follow their orders, you can never be held accountable for your own actions. It's an ingenious display of brainwashing. There are a lot of dead innocent Vietnamese women and children because of that state waiver from personal moral responsibility. I can never say "those poor innocent Vietnamese villagers burned to death by U.S. airstrikes", because in America, that might be sedition, and I would be "unpatriotic" and not "support the troops".
How about this...Give me liberty and stop BRINGING DEATH to 3rd world people in dirt huts thousands of miles away.
I feel like posting this after every one of Boxes comments, Alias would have loved this one
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Historically, that is the moral excuse for a lot of immoral and inhumane behavior - "I was just following orders", "I was just doing my job".
Twist n turn, bob and weave, shimmy and shake... this cop wasn't following orders... he was following the law. A law that most Americans agree with and support. Most Americans want to keep unregistered, uninsured cars and unlicensed drivers off the road. This cop was making a routine traffic stop. Two murders killed this cop for no reason other than he was doing what the American people hired him to do.
Right Wing Rabid Rhetoric, the type that is common on this board helped kill that cop. If he thought that his constitutional rights are being infringed on...THEN HE SHOULD FILE A LAW SUIT... NOT KILL THE COP WHO WAS HIRED BY THE TAXPAYERS TO ENFORCE THE LAW. The law that was written by the legislators who were elected by the taxpayers...
You seem to justify murder, as long as it's murder that can be classified as Anti Govt murder.
Amazing... you are defending two men who murdered a police officer because of a traffic stop. You should be ashamed.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
RIGHT. THE first statement has to be correct for the resulting conclusion of the second to be correct.
Since 1 is incorrect, (Sounds like box can't wait until the practice of political prisoners begins) you cannot infer the resulting conclusion of 2.
In your mind, the first statement is true, I assume, they were your own words.
Quoted Text
It appears we now have Cicero and Henry lining up next to Timothy McVeigh, on the side of anti govt.
You compared me and henry to a mass murderer that bombed a government building because of our disagreement with federal government foreign and domestic policy. My inference was based off of YOUR statement. Since you are comparing me to McVeigh because of my WORDS on a forum, I am inferring that you would also like me locked up like McVeigh and even ban my words. Not a slippery slope but an inference based on YOUR McVeigh post.
Hey, but I agree, the original statement is incorrect. Your McVeigh comment was just another example of your mental instability and extremism.
I hope you learned something today wannabe lawyer boy.LOL
You seem to justify murder, as long as it's murder that can be classified as Anti Govt murder.
Amazing... you are defending two men who murdered a police officer because of a traffic stop. You should be ashamed.
What the hell are you talking about? I never defended anybody that murdered anybody. All I did was point out that the state government murders at a much higher volume than the average American citizen and it is justified by clowns like you. I condemn ALL MURDER! You on the other hand have separate rules for those that commit murder under a government flag or badge. I defend SELF DEFENSE.
I hope you learned something today wannabe lawyer boy.LOL
No, Most conversations with you leave me knowing less than when I started. Many of your posts make no sense at all. I tried to instruct you but I'm afraid it was hopeless and takes up too much of my time. Not worth the effort.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
You compared me and henry to a mass murderer that bombed a government building because of our disagreement with federal government foreign and domestic policy.
I may have wrongly included Henry. I posted McVeigh's reasons for terrorism and you agreed with them. You included McVeigh in your views... then run from them.
(My question) Would you side with Timothy McVeigh and blow up US Federal buildings killing 168 Americans, many of them children... to protest the Waco and Ruby Ridge incidents? McVeigh hoped to inspire a revolt against what he considered to be a tyrannical federal government.
(Cicero's Response) Quoted Text " a tyrannical government bent on curbing individual freedoms"
"Ahhh, yup, sounds about right." First you side with Terrorists McVeigh, then run away from him.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
No, Most conversations with you leave me knowing less than when I started. Many of your posts make no sense at all. I tried to instruct you but I'm afraid it was hopeless and takes up too much of my time. Not worth the effort.
Good choice box...Pack it in and try to save face while you have a sliver of dignity left.
Logged
