Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Communitarians, Neorepublicans, and Guns: Assessing the Case for Firearms Prohibition
http://i2i.org/SuptDocs/Crime/commun1.htm ^ | 3/14/03 | Maryland Law Review

Posted on 03/14/2003 6:03:09 PM PST by tpaine

Introduction

It is high time for the federal government to outlaw gun possession by anyone except the police and the military, and to round up all firearms currently in private hands. Millions of Americans think so, but even the most aggressive of America's gun control groups have not been willing to advocate such a policy. Into the breach has stepped the Communitarian Network, arguably the most influential think tank in Washington. In a lengthy position paper, The Case for Domestic Disarmament (Domestic Disarmament), the Communitarian Network presents a forceful law-and-policy case for a gun-free America.

Domestic Disarmament is noteworthy because it is almost the only scholarly document arguing at length for confiscating all guns, rather than merely outlawing the future production of certain "bad" guns (such as handguns and so-called "assault weapons"). Domestic Disarmament is particularly important because it is a product of the Communitarian Network, the think tank that, far more than any other, has the ear of President Clinton and many other leading Democrats (and *440 some Republicans).
Moreover, Domestic Disarmament offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue--from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights.

This Article evaluates and responds to Domestic Disarmament and the Communitarian Network's gun prohibition agenda. In addition to discussing Domestic Disarmament, this Article considers David C. Williams's Civic Republicanism and the Citizen Militia: The Terrifying Second Amendment, which calls for a somewhat different communitarian approach to gun policy. Williams argues that the Second Amendment poses no impediment to any form of gun control on individuals, and in the long term, the government should revive the "well regulated Militia" and encourage citizen proficiency with arms and participation in communal defense organizations.

Part I of this Article provides an overview of communitarianism and the Communitarian Network and summarizes the argument of Domestic Disarmament. Part II inquires into whether domestic disarmament is enforceable and what communitarian problems may be raised by enforceability issues. Part III sketches a variety of possible solutions to the American gun dilemma, including the communitarian militia proposals of Williams.
Part IV briefly reviews the contribution that firearms ownership may make to public safety, and Part V closely scrutinizes Domestic Disarmament's conclusion that the Second Amendment presents no barrier to firearms confiscation.

For too long, the American gun control debate has avoided the most fundamental issues. The progun and antigun lobbies both agree that there are "good" gun owners and "bad" gun owners; the main issues concern drawing a line between the two and determining what kinds of measures should be used to keep the two groups separate. In addition, the antigun lobbies argue that there are good guns (many types of rifles and shotguns) and bad guns (handguns and assault weapons) and that no gun control policy should deprive good Americans of their good guns.

Nevertheless, none of the major policy groups participating in the American gun debate argues, as does the Communitarian Network, that America's gun policy should be modeled on Japan's, in which communitarian values prevail, guns are almost entirely prohibited, and gun violence is rare.

By forcefully raising the issue of whether any Americans should have guns at all, the Communitarian Network performs a great service by inviting inquiry into the most fundamental premises of the American gun control debate. In this Article, the authors hope to advance the inquiry begun by Domestic Disarmament.

(Excerpt) Read more at i2i.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last
Very long article, lots of footnotes, well researched, -- and even gives rational counterarguments on the issue. Good reference work, but really hard to stomach the spin.

Take a good shot of your favorite calming agent before reading further.

1 posted on 03/14/2003 6:03:10 PM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tpaine
"It is high time for the federal government to outlaw gun possession by anyone except the police and the military, and to round up all firearms currently in private hands. Millions of Americans think so,"

Yeah, and millions DON'T think so. But those people's rights never matter to liberals, do they?
2 posted on 03/14/2003 6:06:35 PM PST by Sofa King (-I am Sofa King- tired of liberal BS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Of course liberals (and some repubs) would be happy to take care of the non compliant
seizing their assets in the process
3 posted on 03/14/2003 6:14:15 PM PST by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
BANG!
4 posted on 03/14/2003 6:16:14 PM PST by Ches
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Every sentence of this stuff is an offense to any thinking human.

I don't ever write web sites over this stuff, normally. I had to on this one.

This is one of the worst articles I've ever read.. I'm appalled.
5 posted on 03/14/2003 6:18:50 PM PST by Monty22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Is the Maryland Law Review funded by our tax dollars?

Law students sad, just plain sad....
6 posted on 03/14/2003 6:20:00 PM PST by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Moreover, Domestic Disarmament offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue--from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights.

Not so. Basically the same ol' argument that been going on for the last 100 years.

7 posted on 03/14/2003 6:22:29 PM PST by Jagdgewehr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
...the Communitarian Network, arguably the most influential think tank in Washington."

I never heard of 'em before this. They must preach to a very small choir.

8 posted on 03/14/2003 6:22:48 PM PST by Abcdefg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Moreover, Domestic Disarmament government regulation of conservative speech offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue of conservative bias in the media leading to the proliferation of hateful speech -- from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights.

The next logical step, IMHO. A nice quick edit, and goodbye First Amendment.

9 posted on 03/14/2003 6:25:35 PM PST by CFC__VRWC ("Diplomats! The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

10 posted on 03/14/2003 6:27:15 PM PST by glock rocks (kick a poodle for W. do it today)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Won't work. If a small percentage of (illegal) drug users can support a huge black market, just think of the black market in firearms. Firearms are a lot more popular than whacky-tabbaccy.
11 posted on 03/14/2003 6:29:24 PM PST by LibKill (The UN is of less use than dog doo in the gutter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
"Come pry the gun out of my cold dead hand."
12 posted on 03/14/2003 6:31:50 PM PST by 1stFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Click to enlarge to 420KB
13 posted on 03/14/2003 6:32:19 PM PST by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
What is happening is like playing a card game with the gun banners where no matter what the outcome of the game they get to play again. Every time they win you get screwed and then they set up for the next card game which you have to play. If they lose you win nothing and they set up for the next card game which you have to play. Now I don't have a problem debating with someone about things when we all agree on what freedom is and that is not the topic of debate. With these people we are debating whether we should be slaves or not and it seems to me that we shouldn't be debating with them nor having to worry about the next game of cards. Sometimes a direct approach is called for.
14 posted on 03/14/2003 6:32:57 PM PST by FSPress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

From the Chapter "Nasty things may happen" : Armed Resistance:

As the specter of myriad American civilians fighting their own government to retain their gun rights were not troubling enough, there is evidence that at least some members of the armed forces would join the resistance. Many members of the armed services are gun culture types: they own firearms themselves, are convinced that Americans have the inalienable right to keep and bear arms, and they take an oath to defend the Constitution from every enemy, "foreign or domestic." [139] It is therefore likely that at least some in the military would not simply look the other way as the government attempted to enforce a policy of domestic disarmament. [140] A master's thesis studying the attitudes of American soldiers found that the large majority would not obey orders to fire on citizens who resisted gun confiscation. [141

The master's thesis may be located by googling 29 palms questionaire. It was posted to FR but has been nuked from the server IIRC .

15 posted on 03/14/2003 6:36:41 PM PST by kaylar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Hum... What is the root word of communitarianism?
16 posted on 03/14/2003 6:59:41 PM PST by Ches
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sofa King
"It is high time for the federal government to outlaw gun possession by anyone except the police and the military, and to round up all firearms currently in private hands. Millions of Americans think so,"

You can add my name to the "I don't think so" camp. I don't claim authorship of the following - but it seems pretty much on point.



"I refuse to be a sheep. I refuse to let anyone have power over me. I am no vigilante, but I know that I have a right to be here as much as anyone else in the world, and some idiot who is looking for some quick cash for whatever reason is not gonna take me out without a fight.

Because the world has dishonest people, I carry.

Because the world has murderers and thieves, I carry.

Because they could be the next person I meet on the street, I carry.

And because I refuse to be a victim, I carry.

I will state without apology my belief in God and my right to keep and bear arms.

I will take charge of my own personal safety.

I will give myself a fighting chance by carrying my concealed weapon.

I will not depend on the government, the police, or others to protect me.

I will always obey the gun laws.

I will constantly be alert to my surroundings.

I will acknowledge and accept the responsibility of carrying a concealed weapon.

I will not take unnecessary risks because I am carrying.

I will promote and continue to fight for my right to keep and bear arms as an American.

And I will always, always, always carry."
17 posted on 03/14/2003 7:01:51 PM PST by qvack (Gunfighting Rule #1 - You must have a gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kaylar
The master's thesis may be located by googling 29 palms questionaire. It was posted to FR but has been nuked from the server IIRC .



And if anyone doubts the the 29 Palms survey exists; I have a faxed copy of the actual survey from one of the sites that administered it.
18 posted on 03/14/2003 7:04:24 PM PST by Dalite (... Comment to all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
"Take a good shot of your favorite calming agent before reading further."

They lost me with the first word in the title--"communitarianism" being simply another alias for Communism. The TRUE agenda (Communism) having been pretty much discredited by the completely vicious and inhumane treatments of their own citizens, the advocates of Communist ideas now find it necessary to re-invent themselves under another name.

It is no surprise that "citizen (aka "domestic) disarmament" is high on the agenda, as failure to do so might result in resistance of said citizens when the government jack-booted goons come to arrest, torture, and/or kill them.

19 posted on 03/14/2003 7:07:35 PM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FSPress
Every time they win you get screwed and then they set up for the next card game which you have to play. If they lose you win nothing and they set up for the next card game which you have to play.

That's because the wrong things have been allowed to be discussed. We need to pressure, force or coerce congress into evaluating firearm legislation the right way. Any debate should be about what regulations are to be repealed, and in what order.

20 posted on 03/14/2003 7:24:13 PM PST by Aarchaeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kaylar
Visualize the heads of politicians who sponsor this sort of thing exploding like watermelons as votes are registerd from the rooftops...
21 posted on 03/14/2003 7:35:11 PM PST by Noumenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
This thing is basically simple. The question to these cretins is, are you willing to die trying to deprive me of the 2'nd ammendment? Because, I AM willing to die defending it.
22 posted on 03/14/2003 7:40:31 PM PST by merak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Monty22
I'm appalled

And well you should be. But this is what passes for thinking on the other 'side'. No amount of slaughter and human suffering, no atrocity too great to stand in the way of the sick utopian dreams these monsters harbor. They are convinced that they are right, and it is an article of faith that they are meant to rule - and by any means necessary.

Each and every one of them deserves to die.

23 posted on 03/14/2003 7:41:36 PM PST by Noumenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
It is high time for the federal government to outlaw gun possession by anyone except the police and the military, and to round up all firearms currently in private hands.

That very first sentence says it all: A state where only the police and military have guns is, by definition, a police state.

24 posted on 03/14/2003 7:43:56 PM PST by Skibane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon
Molon Labe.
25 posted on 03/14/2003 7:53:08 PM PST by Bedford Forrest (Roger, Contact, Judy, Out. Fox One. Splash one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Moreover, Domestic Disarmament offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue--from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights.

Communitarian-- have to keep that term in mind.

26 posted on 03/14/2003 8:00:30 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Communitarians! (spit!)
27 posted on 03/14/2003 8:07:49 PM PST by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
No need to read this. We all know what happens when people are unarmed and their goobermint is armed.

No need to read this. We all know why these people want us unarmed, and it ain't for our safety.

No need to read this. We know what idiots these "junk scientists" liberals are.

28 posted on 03/14/2003 8:10:38 PM PST by PatrioticAmerican (Arm Up! They Have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
The root of their "ban guns" campaign is using government guns to enforce the no gun policy. That, alone, shoots their idea full of holes.

"We hate guns, so we will use guns to disarm the people."
29 posted on 03/14/2003 8:13:19 PM PST by PatrioticAmerican (Arm Up! They Have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
Read more of the article ... the author is on our side.
30 posted on 03/14/2003 8:13:57 PM PST by coloradan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Read the entire article folks. Its not a gun-grabber screed, but an article by pro-2A authors to debunk the gun-grabber's screed.

Here is the .pdf version of the same thing. Its actually a good read, chockful of calm rational debunking of the 'disarmament' arguments. Besides, one look at the author, Dave Kopel, tells me that this is NOT a gun-grabber's screed. Add Don Kates, Eugene Volokh, and others to the people involved in this article, its a virtual plethora of pro-2A scholars and researchers.

31 posted on 03/14/2003 8:17:19 PM PST by Frohickey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Not going to bother to read it. Do they at least admit they need to amend the Constitution first?
32 posted on 03/14/2003 8:21:11 PM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
"It is high time for the federal government to outlaw gun possession by anyone except the police and the military, and to round up all firearms currently in private hands."

It's not every day you hear someone call for civil war.

33 posted on 03/14/2003 8:21:28 PM PST by Uncle Miltie (Wheat is Murder! (Tilling slaughters worms.....))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA
The article is written by friendlies, rebutting the claims of the gun banners. And well.
34 posted on 03/14/2003 9:38:08 PM PST by coloradan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: coloradan
Actually, the first sentence sounds exactly like a former supervisor of mine. He calmly, rationally, and sanely insisted that the best thing for society was to do a house to house search for those nasty guns & get rid of them once and for all...

OH, and he's Jewish. I can't understand the willful ignoring of history. He lost grandparents in the Holocaust for heavens sake. I'd have tactical nukes in my basement if I were Jewish. 'If you come for me...we'll all go together' kind of logic.
35 posted on 03/14/2003 9:43:22 PM PST by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon
You need to check out this thread, where Pitchfork is making a similar claim... he wants to run a "cost-benefit" analysis on our Rights to own guns, to see if it's worth it.
36 posted on 03/14/2003 9:58:50 PM PST by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: tpaine; ~Kim4VRWC's~
Excellent list of Free Republic pages maintained by freeper, ~Kim4VRWC's~:
Updated Gun Control and related links here (#9)

37 posted on 03/14/2003 10:01:28 PM PST by First_Salute
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: First_Salute
Hi there! I think some of the links have stopped working..which is a shame..

thanks for the ping!
38 posted on 03/14/2003 10:14:30 PM PST by Freedom2specul8 (Please pray for our troops.... http://anyservicemember.navy.mil/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jagdgewehr
"Moreover, Domestic Disarmament offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue--from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights."


Not so. Basically the same ol' argument that been going on for the last 100 years.
-JG-

Exactly, and its been going on here at FR for over five years.
-- Closet 'communitarians' abound on this site, - those who argue that some rights must be limited for just ~their~ single issue, of course.
- The fact is, - that once the prohibition camel has its nose in the tent on one issue, the game is up for grabs on the rest.
39 posted on 03/14/2003 11:13:17 PM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
BTTT
40 posted on 03/15/2003 1:53:39 AM PST by spodefly (This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

Moreover, Domestic Disarmament offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue--from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights.

The authors quickly gloss over this major detail. The first responsibility for each citizen is to not initiate harm/force, threat of harm/force or fraud against another person or their property. That must be the first and paramount priority. Since every politician, bureaucrat and government employee is first a citizen, they have the same paramount priority.

A person that is in possession of a gun or any object does not equate to the person having initiated harm/force against another person. On the other hand, threatening to throw a person in jail because they are in possession of a gun is a threat of force against a person that is minding their own business.

It's not about rights nearly as much as it is about who is initiating force, threat of force and fraud against people that are minding their own business.

It's been said often that a sign of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. I'd say that doing the same thing and expecting a different result is a sure sign of incompetence and irrationality.

Politicians and bureaucrats aren't insane. They know exactly what they are doing. And a main stream news media is glad to facilitate the politicians and bureaucrats, lies and deceptions. That is also true for the authors that wrote the above article for the Maryland Law Review

Why do you think congress is so often called lawmakers? If there aren't enough problems for politicians and bureaucrats to proclaim they're trying to solve they create "boogie man" problems -- problems that don't exist -- and then proclaim to be working on solving those problems.

Now, as far as job security goes that isn't irrational or necessarily incompetent. Least wise not on a purely self-serving basis. But their job security does not take precedence over what they are paid to do.

What is the primary job/duty of government? To protect people and their property from the initiation of force, fraud and threat of force -- to protect people and their property from being harmed by others.

Creating "boogie man" problems and then proclaiming to work on solving those problem for the purpose of job security is fraud. On the scale that politicians in Washington do it it is massive fraud. A third to half of federal government expenditures are spent on frauds created by politicians and bureaucrats in Washington.

That's to be expected when the method politicians and bureaucrats use to fund government is threat of force in the first place. So right off the bat politicians and bureaucrats are in bed with creating injustice.

Income taxes are collected by strong arm tactics: "if you don't pay your taxes you'll be fined and go to jail". Conversely, a consumption tax such as the National Retail Sales Tax (NRST) is a voluntary tax. Wherein if you don't want to pay the tax don't buy the item.

Compared to the massive fraud implemented by politicians and bureaucrats, fraud in the business community barley registers on the "Richter" scale.

Simply put, for the past 150 years government objective is to expand government jobs, cash-flow and control. In that sense it is not unlike any business. But government is not a business and the people never intended for the government to have the growth and control dynamics of a business. The only, I repeat, the only way the government could expand its cash flow, size and control to a hundred times the power and size of the largest fortune 50 companies was by initiating force. The initiation of force is enacted as laws by politicians and bureaucrats. Their minions do the dirty work of initiating the physical force.

Who are the wealth providers and who are the parasites? Who offers competitive products and services in a free market? Who provides jobs, necessities and luxuries to sustain and enhance human life? Who forces people to buy their services or else go to jail?  Who initiates force, threat of force and fraud?

Politicians and bureaucrats are far more destructive and harmful to innocent people than all petty criminals combined. And for sure, business and science have done more to benefit people than politicians and bureaucrats. Those two -- government and business-science -- for the most part at this point in time are opposing forces.

The masses are increasingly understanding the frauds impinged on them by politicians and bureaucrats. And that "wake-up" awareness is only going to escalate. As is their awareness and understanding that business and science provides them with massive benefits. Those two effects are caused by people waking up the power of their own rational conscious faculties as the only real and valid authority -- sounding the death knell of the status quo.

Politicians and bureaucrats as well as main stream media reporters and journalists and academics are becoming increasingly aware of that. For sure, it will be interesting to see which ones hang on fighting tooth and nail to the very end despite the unavoidable demise of the status quo -- a lesson in futility. ...And who will flip to rational competence and redeem themselves honorably with integrity as they hold themselves accountable for their past harms inflicted on what was in the past an unsuspecting people.

That is/will occur faster than most people can imagine. To understand why is to understand how the illusions foisted on people of whom holds real power and honor has been hidden from the masses by manipulating mysticism in the minds of the masses. And how thin the veil has been stretched. It has been stretched tissue thin and will fall apart/collapse like a water-logged tissue. Think of how quickly Nicolae Ceausescu was brought down when "X" number of people saw though the illusion of power.

41 posted on 03/15/2003 3:05:52 AM PST by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
It is high time for the federal government to outlaw gun possession by anyone except the police and the military, and to round up all firearms currently in private hands

It sounds like the author is attempting to overthrow the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution. As such he should be arrested and tried for sedition.

But since that is unlikely to happen, the treasonous bastards may as well start confiscation. It's inevitable, and I'd rather deal with it sooner rather than later.

42 posted on 03/15/2003 3:34:59 AM PST by Mulder (It's all for nothing if you don't have Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee; FreedomPoster
Y'all just got to see this roll of toilet paper.
43 posted on 03/15/2003 4:10:19 AM PST by Vigilantcitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
What the heck is a "Communitarian"?
Why would it be important that this people have the ear of the Clintons?
What 440 Republicans? (I haven't read far enough to find what the asterik means)
And don't these people know that the gun issue became a "third rail" for nearly all the democrats in the last election?
Having the Brady Bunch's endorsement was the "Kiss of Death".
I'm going to have to have a whole lot of coffee before I can read much more of this bilge!
44 posted on 03/15/2003 5:38:57 AM PST by pro2A Mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frohickey
I will read the .pdf version, but it should, at the beginning give us a little more of a hint. Course, that could be the hook! Get an anti reading it and agreeing, and then slowly turn things around!
If that is so, then this article isn't meant for "US", it's meant for "them"! ;-)
45 posted on 03/15/2003 5:45:47 AM PST by pro2A Mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
1997

This is SIX YEARS OLD!!!

46 posted on 03/15/2003 5:53:48 AM PST by pro2A Mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Tne Communitarian network is just plain old totalitarian in my opinion. Madatory harvesting of organs for transplant to the [ruling elite]. Forced "morality" for the people.

If they were to become a significant force with the USA so that their priciples were being enacted it would be time to take out as many of their supporters as possible before one was harvested for one's organs.

47 posted on 03/15/2003 6:24:07 AM PST by harpseal (Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
Moreover, Domestic Disarmament offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue--from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights.


Communitarian-- have to keep that term in mind.
26 -KH-

Indeed, - keep it in mind as you scroll through all the threads on FR that advocate limiting individual rights for just one more social cause.
Communitarian ideas are an insidious disease infecting otherwise rational conservatives, - those who are fixated on single issue political 'solutions'.
48 posted on 03/15/2003 7:48:01 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Frohickey
Yep, there does seem to be a clever method to their 'madness'.
And, - ya gotta love that title.

- I searched the article in vain for more detail about 'neo'-republicans. Anyone have more info on them?

49 posted on 03/15/2003 8:00:35 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DManA; Roscoe
Not going to bother to read it. Do they at least admit they need to amend the Constitution first?
-32-

Haven't you heard?
The communitarian Congress has passed acts that give them the right to prohibit most anything they deem 'evil'. - Drugs, guns, big flush toilets, whatever...
Its the new free neorepublic!
Ask roscoe about this hot new concept on neoliberty. He seems to lead FR advocates of this agenda.

50 posted on 03/15/2003 8:19:25 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson