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: Lazarus_Long who wrote (45010)	2/8/2006 4:38:57 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

"Gov'ts don't take NO for an answer here. That threat of force is behind their actions. Their actions are legal because they say what the law is, not you." They have the force that you and I authorize them (through representative democracy) to have in order to make "justice" an OBJECTIVE endeavor--and not the subjective anarchy of gangs and drug dealers--or freaky neighbours. All people may use force in the appropriate circumstances; and all people are limited as to the degree of force they may use. Representatives of Government have been known to use unlawful force--just as citizens have been known to use unlawful force. But the lawful use of force is not capricious. It must be measured and it must be commensurate. Any unlawful abridgement of your property rights allows you to command the lawful use of force against the perpetrators. I say "unlawful" intentionally rather than "wrongful" because I fully recognise that there may be claims to moral or natural right which are not recognised by law. There is lawful force and there is unlawful force. Citizens and Governments are capable of both alternatives...