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: TimF who wrote (45137)	2/9/2006 9:18:10 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

""we the people" are wrong about this." Well, that would make you right, wouldn't it?? "I do not agree that I have any onus to obey whatever legislation congress or my state legislature passes. I also don't agree with the idea that I have a moral obligation to follow every regulation" Well, that would put you above the law, wouldn't it? "I have an obligation not to violate others even if there was no law against it." But YOU will determine what is a violation and NOT the law of "we the people"--RIGHT?? History puts you in some pretty frightening company, I'm sorry to say. "I might not have a moral obligation not to grow, but, sell, smoke or possess pot" You don't consider following the laws of a democratic society a moral obligation?? What if we all thought like you??? Without the expectation that people will follow the rule of law, there IS NO EXPECTATION of Rights and Freedoms. "I would not initiating force against anyone and I would not commit fraud against anyone by smoking pot" This is one of the straw men you introduced with some other straw men. I said that all people were ALLOWED to use force in particular measured ways. I said that ALL force has lawful limitations imposed by "we the people" in order to safeguard the liberty of the person. I have stated over and over (what--a dozen times or so??) that law enforcement ALSO has the right to use force in prescribed and measured ways under the LAW. I did not say anything about defending your initiation of force being the ONLY justification for using force. When you break the law, you violate the integrity of the law and the rights and freedoms of other people whom have agreed not to place themselves above the law and thereby not to condemn society to the survival of the most cunning and vicious. How much force will be used to bring you to justice will depend on how much of a danger you represent to society. For selling marijuana (or whatever you were doing with it) you will be arrested and a trial date will be set. Not a lot of force in that. If you attack a peace officer for doing his/her duty as a citizen, then sufficient force will be used against you to deal with YOUR ADDITIONAL crime and additional threat. You are not above the law. When people decide to make their own laws (as you apparently feel entitled to do), then there is no objective law left. There is simply the law of claw, fang, and talon--the morality of the bear, the wolf, and the vulture. But go for it, Tim. Break whatever laws you don't like--keeping in mind that you must consider the risk (as you said) of getting caught. Go for it.