Author Topic: so long habeus corpus. (Read 5944 times)

Viking · « **Reply #300 on:** October 27, 2006, 07:53:01 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
i thought the republicans unbanned the "assault rifles" that the democrats had baned. also the repubs passed laws to protect gun mfg from frivolous and expensive lawsuits.

That law was ineffective anyways, so no big loss for the power-elite. Still handguns are completely banned in some US cities and the restrictions are just getting worse. I know that the Republicans are probably not the worst in this case, but they and the Democrats are like two mafia families fighting for dominance; a two-party democracy is just one party away from dictatorship. Sooner or later they will try to gain control over your guns. Just sayin'.

john9001 · « **Reply #301 on:** October 27, 2006, 07:59:17 AM »

viking, i respect your opinion, even if we don't agree

Viking · « **Reply #302 on:** October 27, 2006, 08:22:52 AM »

Likewise Sir.

lazs2 · « **Reply #303 on:** October 27, 2006, 10:15:52 AM »

viking I believe that you are making my point. It is a government that demonzies it's own citizens that is the worry to me.

Also... the governments and situations you describe all have one thing in common.. the governments tried or succeeded in disarming everyone but themselves before they started murdering citizens.

I believe that the democrtats want to disarm us. I believe that bigger government and a disarmed sheeple is not a good thing.

chair makes a good point about one U.S. citizen affected by the law. I would say, but don't know the particulars or the law, that if you fight for an enemy of your country then you are no longer considered a citizen or... at least... you would give up your rights as one.

Even at that... I would like to see any citizen go through a civilian court system.

viking is correct tho that we are losing more of our freedoms.. and it does bother me. I think that we aren't losing our freedoms to each other tho or because of the economy... we are losing em because our government is becoming more powerful.

Every citizen looks over his shoulder these days because he is either breaking or about to break some rule or regulation or law..

Is it because we are a lawless and imoral people or....

It it because we have too many laws and to big a government?

I say the latter.

lazs

Chairboy · « **Reply #304 on:** October 27, 2006, 10:21:40 AM »

Agreed.

On an aside, I hope the folks who support these changes to the law have thought out the following:

Eventually the democrats will get elected again, and this means that _they_ will have this unprecedented executive power. Perhaps you can have faith that the Republican administration won't abuse these powers, but can you be as sure that the democrats will excercise the same restraint? The power of the government and the branches should be limited at every opportunity.

lazs2 · « **Reply #305 on:** October 27, 2006, 10:30:54 AM »

agreed chair... that is the big con that we all fall for over and over..

We don't mind giving power to "our guy" cause he won't use it against us...but... we are too stupid to realize that when the other guy get's in he has a whole lot more power than he would have had and now he will go after the guys he doesn't like.

What happens is.. when the lefties get in they use the power in ways like ruby ridge and Waco... the right wingers go after the left wing groups.

Either way...government forces kill citizens over the most minor infractions in the myriad of laws they have to charge people with.

I guess we do get the government we deserve.

If you vote for new laws or want to take away someone elses freedom to maybe save you a buck or feel a little safer.... you are part of the problem..

If you vote for more taxes on anyone.... you are part of the problem.

If you vote for more regulations...you are part of the problem...

If you vote for democrts you most assuredly are part of the problem.

If you never write your representitves then you are part of the problem.

lazs

Chairboy · « **Reply #306 on:** October 27, 2006, 10:37:24 AM »

I agree with all of the above and add Republicans to the 'if you vote for them, you're part of the problem'. The Republicans might not be as bad as the Democrats on some personal liberty issues, but they're worse in some of the others.

Both parties apply a vigorous vacuum to any environment they cohabitate.

lazs2 · « **Reply #307 on:** October 27, 2006, 10:43:29 AM »

I agree... but... I am pragmatic... the republicans are walking toward big government and socialism while the democrats and their women politicians are running toward it.

while I admit there is little choice I say that some is better than none. I say that if there is no way a democrat will get in then...

vote your consience... I will vote libertarian this time for gov of kalifornia because the democrat doesn't stand a chance.

perhaps people tracking the results will see that given a choice... we don't like socialism.

To vote democrat in any election tho or to protest vote and let one get in is simply cutting of your nose to spite your face.

lazs

lukster · « **Reply #308 on:** October 27, 2006, 12:02:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
That law was ineffective anyways, so no big loss for the power-elite. Still handguns are completely banned in some US cities and the restrictions are just getting worse. I know that the Republicans are probably not the worst in this case, but they and the Democrats are like two mafia families fighting for dominance; a two-party democracy is just one party away from dictatorship. Sooner or later they will try to gain control over your guns. Just sayin'.

The restrictions are getting worse in some states (blue) but in the majority of US states handgun restrictions are being lifted.

lukster · « **Reply #309 on:** October 27, 2006, 12:07:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Chairboy
Agreed.

On an aside, I hope the folks who support these changes to the law have thought out the following:

Eventually the democrats will get elected again, and this means that _they_ will have this unprecedented executive power. Perhaps you can have faith that the Republican administration won't abuse these powers, but can you be as sure that the democrats will excercise the same restraint? The power of the government and the branches should be limited at every opportunity.

The democrats apply their own interpretation to and abuse the law anyhow so what difference does it make?

Chairboy · « **Reply #310 on:** October 27, 2006, 12:09:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lukster
The democrats apply their own interpretation to and abuse the law anyhow so what difference does it make?

Seriously? That's your response?

You're handing the democrats a loaded gun, helping them aim it at your kids, and shrugging apologetically and saying "these guys are going to do bad stuff anyhow, what difference does it make?"

lukster · « **Reply #311 on:** October 27, 2006, 12:15:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Chairboy
Seriously? That's your response?

You're handing the democrats a loaded gun, helping them aim it at your kids, and shrugging apologetically and saying "these guys are going to do bad stuff anyhow, what difference does it make?"

I'm not handing the democrats anything. I'll do my best to keep them out of power. This new law, as has been pointed out repeatedly, does not apply to US citizens or lawful enemy combatants. It was designed to give us procedures for dealing with Islamic Facists who will not observe the GC. You're going to make yourself dizzy if you keep trying to spin this.

Red Tail 444 · « **Reply #312 on:** October 27, 2006, 03:30:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mace2004
19 representatives of al-Qai'da enter the US and reside here for an extended period of time, capture four airliners and conduct an attack on civilians and the US Military killing 3,000 US citizens, mostly civilians but you'll rely on the Wikipedia to parse this into a non-invasion.

representatives from 84 countries were killed on 9-11, they were not all US citizens. And, at lest 20 were in the US at the time of the attack. And, it wasn't an invasion.

Don't you have something better to do, like run around the house with a pair of scissors or go somewhere and chew on an extension cord? Either of those choices would make a whole hell of a lot more sense than trying to put another adolescent argument together.

x0847Marine · « **Reply #313 on:** October 27, 2006, 03:53:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 2Slow
or is awaiting such determination

Loophole? How long may one be held, in secret, while ones status is "awaiting determination"? Status being "enemy combatant" or "citizen and the law does not apply to one so you get out of jail?"

IMHO "awaiting determination" allows the enforcers to do as they see fit.

People get excited by the term "alien", then say "see it doesn't apply to US citizens.." but thats not how lawyers / gendarme read it. What definition of alien will they use? and do aliens glow a special color so they stick out?

Otherwise there is no reasonible way to seperate Aliens from US citizens other than detention and status determination, or something like a new national US Citizen ID card...

Mace2004 · « **Reply #314 on:** October 27, 2006, 04:13:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Red Tail 444
representatives from 84 countries were killed on 9-11, they were not all US citizens. And, at lest 20 were in the US at the time of the attack. And, it wasn't an invasion.

Don't you have something better to do, like run around the house with a pair of scissors or go somewhere and chew on an extension cord? Either of those choices would make a whole hell of a lot more sense than trying to put another adolescent argument together.

I don't really care very much how many were non-US citizens if the attack took place in our playground and especially if it's not relevant to the discussion. Personally, I prefer the standard black US Gov pen planning technique, so 3,000 is a good enough round number so go blow smoke up someone else's tailpipe.