Posted on 05/10/2008 10:35:03 AM PDT by Towed_Jumper
Conflict between two Federal agencies leads to chaos and conflict...who knew?
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
BLOAT
Joe, One for the Bang List if you feel it’s appropriate.
I think their turf battles have been going on for some time now.
Well everyone should stay low until the shooting is over.
ATF should not exist.
With many of its officials prosecuted as members of a criminal civil-right-violating conspiracy.
Unless the FBI is spelled out in the Constitution, the FBI shouldn’t exist either.
The FBI should investigate only government officials at all levels, from federal to city.
RIGHT!
And the BATF should be done away with!
Right you are!!
AMEN
There ya go, an AFT I can appreciate. ;)
ping
What's the difference?
The Gestapo and the S.S.
What’s the difference?”
The Gestapo was the FBI of the SS.
Gas
Beer
Bait
Barbecue
Pool
What else would one want in life...???
A Jackbooted thug is a Jackbooted thug is a Jackbooted thug.
The FBI and BATF are anti-freedom loving tyrants.
Probably also local law enforcement.
ATF is an organization with no real purpose whose fuinction is to create one.
Last night on the Lou Dobbs show (He’s pro-Second Amendment) he reviewed the case involving some veteran in Wisconsin who is being railroaded by ATF and the local prosecutor because his gun jammed and ran off on full automatic. ATF claims he had a fully automatic weapo, despite the fact that the manufacturer ahd been warned of misfires of this nature by the Federal Gov.
Dobbs interviewed a national law-enfocrement organization rep and he said a similar case was tried and lost on appeal and this guy had dopne nothing wrong, but ATF and the Federal Prosecutor in this case was asting time and money on a bogus case.
It seems we have a lot of Federal Prosecutors like that idiot Sutton who have a political agenda instead of a law enforcment one.
Ammo, of course.
Considering it's the Hill Country...nothing.
Damn right the BATFE should not exist...
A gun shop
And a Guitar Center.
:)
In a republic, as distinct from a totalitarian anarchy, government personnel who without legitimate justification do things that would be illegal for non-government personnel, should be punished at least as severely as would non-government personnel doing those same things.
Any chance of a republic being re-established within the next millennium?
Jerry Pournelle calls much of what the government does “anarcho-tyranny”. It’s a pretty apt descriptor.
http://jerrypournelle.com/archives2/archives2view/view268.html#Anarch
I hadn't realized Chaos Manor was still around. I'd thought it folded with byte.
I'll have to google "anarcho-tyranny" and see exactly what Samuel Francis (the coiner) meant. My intended meaning for the term "totalitarian anarchy" is a bit different form the meaning Mr. Pournelle is ascribing to "a-t" (not sure about Mr. Francis). His uses the term "tyranny" to refer refer merely to the fact that the government goes out of its way to prosecute what it can (whether or not such prosecution serves justice), and "anarcho" to refer merely to the fact that it's not very good at stopping real crime. I view Totalitarian Anarchy a bit differently.
Under complete Totalitarian Anarchy, the people exist to serve the state; the people are allowed no rights beyond those which those in power choose to give them. Agents of the government, however, are not bound by the same laws that bind the people. Indeed, except to the extent that their actions would affect those higher up in government (including by doing overly severe damage to the government's reputation), they're hardly bound by any law whatever.
Totalitarian Anarchy is quite similar to feudalism. The primary differences are
If a government agent breaks into someone's property in the absence of either (1) what he reasonably believes to be a warrant authorizing his manner of entry into the property in question, or (2) the presence of what the agent reasonably believes to be sufficient exigent circumstances to justify entry, then why should that agent not be regarded as a burglar (if he intends and expects to avoid contact with occupants) or a robber (if he expects or intends to initiate contact)?
Is there any reason a truly legitimate government would not have prosecuted all the agents involved in the original Waco raid with eleven counts of felony murder? They all conspired to commit a break-in at the Davidians' home. None of them knew of any plan to actually serve the warrant, thus none could have reasonably believed that their break-in was legal. Further, the break-in was planned well in advance, implying that it was not necessitated by exigent circumstances. Why, then, should the agents not be regarded as robbers, and why should the Felony Murder rule not hold them accountable for the eleven deaths resulting from their crime?
The issue of rogue police agencies and prosecutors of all stripes, local and Federal, is huge. The CATO page on raids gone bad is a great example that highlights part of the problem. What you suggest would go a long way towards substantially reducing those sort of incidents.
The question is, for whom is the slide into Totalitarian Anarchy an unfortunate side-effect of their favored policies, and for whom is it actually the objective?
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.