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.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (44907)	1/24/2006 11:43:41 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

I am legally required to abide by the law. That doesn't mean that I agreed to it, or that following it is in any way voluntary. It is enforced, and that enforcement it backed up with deadly force. Government is all about deadly force. Again I'm not arguing it shouldn't be. It has to back up enforcement with deadly force or enforcement will fail against anyone willing to seriously resist. So government should have the option of deadly force. But the fact that this force is necessary should not be twisted in to the belief that it doesn't exist. Moving away from the simple facts of the situation to opinion, I would state that I believe that because government is enforced by deadly force it should be minimal. The amount of coercion backed by even indirect threats of deadly force should be minimized. But small or large government is backed by deadly force. There is probably no practical way for it to be otherwise. Tim