Posted on 05/05/2006 7:21:22 AM PDT by churchillbuff
If the government opresses you then you use that vote and lobby to change those laws.
You attempt in this example to equate an entity of multiple people to one person. Surely you can do better than that.
Here in this state if a criminal 'opresses' you you are bound to try to flee before you use deadly force. Not that I agree with it, I vote in ways that oppose such a policy but that is the law here today thanks to lefty democrats.
I would suggest to you that this state is in for change as every election cycle shows the state growing more and more red outside Chicago, a bit of rockford area and maybe some of champaign.
I never said the constitution was irrelevant.
TIP: when you have to make up things then you lost the argument. Isn't that the sign of a lefty when they make things up?
ID is not forsaking liberty. Your premise is flawwed and spun like a top.
I beg you to show me how your ID is a violation of your rights. You have yet to do so.
I just said they are already prosecuted for those crimes in the very post you are responding to. I would think that's tanamount to an admission that they are prosecuted via IDs. If they are already prosecuted for those crimes via an ID, why do we need another one?
Oh and your DNA database question? No. Why? Because I'm not a criminal, if I am a suspect in a crime they can come to me with a warrant.
Yes, W is a globalist one worlder. The wish to dismantle the USA and install a socialist regime across the world.
I'm an America firster and somewhat of an isolationist. Not as bad as Pat, but Buchanan and I agree 95% of the time.
The idea in our legal system by the by is tro make it more difficult for LEOs to make cases. Most breaks are given to the accused.
You're advocating a Code Napoleon or even EU style system of justice with your crap.
And the constitution is NOT, I repeat NOT a "living document. Its an enduring one.
Man, you're gettin' beat up all over trhis forum, pal. Do you always bring knives to gunfights?
A National ID with any DNA or biometric info on me, that will track my movements violates the Sixth Amendment.
Do I have to explain to you what a "slippery slope" is?
If the government opresses you then you use that vote and lobby to change those laws.
That is a nice idea, and actually works in a representative republic. But not in a democracy.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage." --Alexander Tyler
I just stated why I'm against national IDs.
I suggest you read ir, statist.
It is laughable that you would say the rule of law means slavery. Or that ID means slavery to the rule of law.
I advocate an ID to hold you accountable TO the constitution.
It amazes me that lengths people will go to claim that our founders were AGAINST ID! Pure Foolishness when they were indeed ESTABLISHING a national ID....that of AMERICANS.
SEE NOW they were PROUD to be identified as AMERICANS and they SIGNED their NAMES to the document that made it all happen......something about a John Hancock???????? To say these folks were against ID would mean that all the forming of the government of this nation was done in private behind closed doors by people that wanted to keep their identity secret! PURE FOOLISHNESS!
WHAT SAY YOU?
Oh no?
In other words, you think the Constitution is irrelevant because it was written so long ago.
When all else fails, resort to lies. Enemies of liberty are so predictable.
Many of those prosecutions are contested for years upon years becasue of a dispute about ID.
The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
You mean the "common sense" that replaced it when it got too old, right?
A specific that directs the action to take in dealing with the internet. How is that? Thatis for the judgment made by congress and approved or disapproved by SCOTUS. The bodies that the constitution gives the power to handle such specifics.
Rattrap, the ID is not effective in prosecution and sanctuary cities have made it so that law enforcment CANNOT EVEN ASK FOR ID...and that is WHY there is no prosecution of ILLEGALS....care to deny that policy of sanctuary cities?
You aren't reading my posts...i never said you need another ID..I have said repeatedly you need one that actually works...do you not know the meaning of the words "INSTEAD OF"?
How can they come to you with a warrant when they cannot ID you in order to get a warrant with your name on it?
How does your DNA on your license track your movements?
Your ATM card does that today now doesn't it? Camera;s in every bank and store do too huh?
Are these all violations of the 6th also? HA HA HA suuuuure they are.
You can chose not to go there. You can chose not to have an ID.....but then you have to accept the consequences of that choice...and THAT is what you are really opposed to.
That makes you the lefty in this conversation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.