Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 7/12/2002 6:36:42 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/12/2002 7:22:35 PM EST by Jetlag]
(aka I LOVE YOU MR. PAUL) Today, as I was scrounging around looking to see what new regulations the dirtbags were cooking up, I came across this, the veritable needle in the haystack. It's long, but it's good. [url=http://members.verizon.net/~vze2ncbk/ar15/text.html]Here it is[/url] [i]Edited because I think people were afraid to click on the previous title[/i]
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 6:40:01 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 6:40:08 PM EST
I assume you're talking about Ron Paul (R-TX)?
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 6:45:44 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 6:52:09 PM EST
Since I'd have to divide this up to 16 individual posts I've decided it be easier to [url=http://members.verizon.net/~vze2ncbk/ar15/text.html]set it up like this.[/url]
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 7:06:49 PM EST
Just a little example of what this guy's rambling about:
As tempting as it may seem, a government is incapable of preventing crimes. On occasion with luck they might succeed. But the failure to tip us off about 9-11 after spending $40 billion a year on intelligence-gathering should surprise no one. Governments by nature are very inefficient institutions. We must accept that as fact. I am sure that our intelligence agency had the information available to head off 9-11, but bureaucratic blundering and turf wars prevented the information from being useful. But the basic principle is wrong. City policeman cannot and should not be expected to try to prevent crimes. This would invite massive intrusions into the everyday activities of every law-abiding citizen. But that is exactly what our recent legislation is doing. It is a wrongheaded approach, no matter how wonderful it may sound. The policemen in the inner cities patrol their beats, but crime is still rampant. In the rural areas of America, literally millions of citizens are safe and secure in their homes though miles from any police protection. They are safe because even the advantage of isolation does not entice the burglar to rob a house when he knows a shotgun sits inside the door waiting to be used. But this is a right denied many of our citizens living in the inner city. The whole idea of government preventing crime is dangerous. To prevent crimes in our homes or businesses, governments would need cameras to spy on every move to check for illegal drug use, wife-beating, child abuse or tax evasion. They would need cameras not only on our streets and in our homes; but our phones, Internet, and travels would need to be constantly monitored just to make sure we are not a terrorist, drug dealer, or tax evader.
View Quote
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 8:01:54 PM EST
Originally Posted By Jetlag: Just a little example of what this guy's rambling about:
As tempting as it may seem, a government is incapable of preventing crimes. On occasion with luck they might succeed. But the failure to tip us off about 9-11 after spending $40 billion a year on intelligence-gathering should surprise no one. Governments by nature are very inefficient institutions. We must accept that as fact. I am sure that our intelligence agency had the information available to head off 9-11, but bureaucratic blundering and turf wars prevented the information from being useful. But the basic principle is wrong. City policeman cannot and should not be expected to try to prevent crimes. This would invite massive intrusions into the everyday activities of every law-abiding citizen. But that is exactly what our recent legislation is doing. It is a wrongheaded approach, no matter how wonderful it may sound. The policemen in the inner cities patrol their beats, but crime is still rampant. In the rural areas of America, literally millions of citizens are safe and secure in their homes though miles from any police protection. They are safe because even the advantage of isolation does not entice the burglar to rob a house when he knows a shotgun sits inside the door waiting to be used. But this is a right denied many of our citizens living in the inner city. The whole idea of government preventing crime is dangerous. To prevent crimes in our homes or businesses, governments would need cameras to spy on every move to check for illegal drug use, wife-beating, child abuse or tax evasion. They would need cameras not only on our streets and in our homes; but our phones, Internet, and travels would need to be constantly monitored just to make sure we are not a terrorist, drug dealer, or tax evader.
View Quote
View Quote
You find something wrong with this?
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 8:06:15 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 8:15:07 PM EST
Originally Posted By ar10er:
Originally Posted By Jetlag: Just a little example of what this guy's rambling about:
*snip*
View Quote
View Quote
You find something wrong with this?
View Quote
Wrong? [i]Wrong??[/i] That's one of the most [b]right[/b] things I've heard come out of D.C. in a long time.
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 8:16:42 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 8:20:14 PM EST
Originally Posted By DoubleFeed: Jetlag, usually the descriptive "rambling" is not applied to things you agree with. [;)]
View Quote
I find myself rambling all the time and usually I do agree with myself. [;)] Sorry for the misconception though.
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 8:46:51 PM EST
Yes, a good read. I found it at LRC: [url]http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul41.html[/url]
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 9:24:33 PM EST
What the hell is wrong with you people? Ron Paul is one of those libertarian losers that people throw their votes away on. Another thing is if you are against a police state, you are cop bashing trash. If the police ran the country you civilians wouldn't have to worry about your precious little Consititution.
Link Posted: 7/12/2002 11:25:36 PM EST
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: Another thing is if you are against a police state, you are cop bashing trash. If the police ran the country you civilians wouldn't have to worry about your precious little Consititution.
View Quote
You like men in uniform don't ya?
Link Posted: 7/13/2002 1:31:10 AM EST
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: If the police ran the country you civilians wouldn't have to worry about your precious little Consititution.
View Quote
A profound statement, preceeded by total BS.
Link Posted: 7/13/2002 1:36:30 AM EST
Another newbie takes the bait...
Link Posted: 7/13/2002 2:56:22 AM EST
I know SUCKED IN, three years I've been reading folowing this site and I get sucked in. Posted as JBYRD on the old site, maybe 10 posts... Those posts helped get past my black rifle newbie troubles.
Link Posted: 7/13/2002 10:01:03 AM EST
Best damn read I had in years. Thanks for posting it. Had to be from a Texan TXLEWIS
Link Posted: 7/13/2002 10:32:28 AM EST
Ron Paul for President!
Link Posted: 7/13/2002 12:31:19 PM EST
Originally Posted By im8upat45: I know SUCKED IN, three years I've been reading folowing this site and I get sucked in. Posted as JBYRD on the old site, maybe 10 posts... Those posts helped get past my black rifle newbie troubles.
View Quote
You'll live through it. Imbro is our reigning Master of Sardonic Wit. Think of it as part of the breaking in process. [:D]
Top Top