Senate Bill Demands the Military Lock Up American Citizens without due process of LAW

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Glocktogo

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 12, 2007
Messages
29,492
Reaction score
15,887
Location
Collinsville
Is it better to be unafraid and dead?

At least you and your family will rest easy knowing you never let them intimidate you...

It's always interesting to see where people draw their line in the sand. At what point they say "Enough, no more!". In a free country, the people are free to make that very personal decision. We are rapidly loosing that freedom. At what point do you consider yourself to no longer be free?

Seems to me the only thing I should fear is to trespass against my fellow man. He should feel the same. That's no longer the case in this country. IMO, we are no longer free. This is a sad time in the history of our nation. Question is, how much sadder will it get? :(
 

Dale00

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 28, 2006
Messages
7,462
Reaction score
3,868
Location
Oklahoma
It's always interesting to see where people draw their line in the sand. At what point they say "Enough, no more!". In a free country, the people are free to make that very personal decision. We are rapidly loosing that freedom. At what point do you consider yourself to no longer be free?

Seems to me the only thing I should fear is to trespass against my fellow man. He should feel the same. That's no longer the case in this country. IMO, we are no longer free. This is a sad time in the history of our nation. Question is, how much sadder will it get? :(

"But, but... it's the government's job to protect us." This is the attitude that has gotten us so many useless laws and restricted our freedoms. - On an individual level, certainly.

But on the national level the government does need to protect the borders. Now the problem is where do we put terrorism on the spectrum between the individual level and national level. I wish there was an easy answer to this one, but I don't think that there is.
 

henschman

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
24
Location
Oklahoma City
Dale00 said:
Consider that perhaps there are plots underway to carry out major attacks against us in this country a la September 11th. We arrest the leader of that plot. Do we allow him access to a lawyer? If we do and he uses his lawyer to pass the code word for "attack now" on to his as yet unarrested team members, then something very bad happens.

If we are throwing out hypotheticals, let's consider one that would appear to be a lot more likely, judging by how many times it's happened throughout history: what if the "terrorists" are the ones who are in control of the government, and end up using this type of law to terrorize the people they are sworn to protect?

Judging by the historical body count, it would appear that over-powerful governments are a lot more of a threat to our lives than terrorists or criminals. We should take this into consideration when considering whether laws like this really make us safer. People talk about "striking a balance between security and freedom," but really, freedom is all about security. No one is very safe without freedom. It is idiotic to think that you are making yourself more secure by giving more power to the number one threat to your security, which would be your own government.
 

Glocktogo

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 12, 2007
Messages
29,492
Reaction score
15,887
Location
Collinsville
If we are throwing out hypotheticals, let's consider one that would appear to be a lot more likely, judging by how many times it's happened throughout history: what if the "terrorists" are the ones who are in control of the government, and end up using this type of law to terrorize the people they are sworn to protect?

Judging by the historical body count, it would appear that over-powerful governments are a lot more of a threat to our lives than terrorists or criminals. We should take this into consideration when considering whether laws like this really make us safer. People talk about "striking a balance between security and freedom," but really, freedom is all about security. No one is very safe without freedom. It is idiotic to think that you are making yourself more secure by giving more power to the number one threat to your security, which would be your own government.

When terrorists rack up a body count approaching that of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and various other officially sanctioned governments have, I'll worry more about giving the military power over Americans on American soil. Till then, how about we use them to keep the bad guys out of the country, and us civvies will worry about any of them that are already here?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom