Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jbe who wrote (56716)	10/2/1999 10:58:00 AM
From: Constant Reader	Respond to of 108807

Man, you ain't never lived in no police state. If you had, you'd appreciate what you have I did. I do. Regards, Randy

To: jbe who wrote (56716)	10/2/1999 11:59:00 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 108807

Ain't that the truth. Bravo.

To: jbe who wrote (56716)	10/5/1999 2:20:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Is that like: "Don't worry about the flooding; It hasn't reached your chin yet!"? BTW, I did visit Russia when it was still part of the USSR, so I have experienced "police states." Objective analysis will lead one to conclude that with the greater powers granted (by the federal government) to the DEA, FBI, BATF, etc., we ARE moving towards a police state. The latest in this trend is the Supreme Court ruling as "Constitutional" the seizing of property (such as a motor vehicle) by police --or their agents -- if such vehicle has been found to be carrying illegal drugs in it even if the owner of the vehicle had no knowledge of the drugs being present. This is, without question, a direct violation of an individual's property rights. Of course it is built on the violation of a private citizen's right to pay for sex, drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes and take other drugs without the interference of the government or intrusion into the individual's life. But that is another "police state" story... Father Terrence