[PetroniusMaximus]

We may, somewhat understandably, defend these actions. But here’s the problem...

What do we do when, because of legal precedent, these tactics are used on us?

We may, sometime soon, be seen as enemies of the state - because we don’t support gay marriage or whatever else they have coming down the pipeline.

[Zhang Fei]

We may, somewhat understandably, defend these actions. But here’s the problem... What do we do when, because of legal precedent, these tactics are used on us? We may, sometime soon, be seen as enemies of the state - because we don’t support gay marriage or whatever else they have coming down the pipeline.

What legal precedents were there for the Holocaust? For the Holodomor? These people did what they wanted and manufactured the paperwork for it. Anyone who resisted was killed. Lawyers like to pump up the importance of their profession. But the reality is that everywhere the Germans or the Japanese won, they slaughtered people, not because some lawyer found loopholes making it legal, but because the leaders decided what they were going to do and the lawyers rubber stamped it with a laundry list of legal verbiage.

[Zhang Fei]

We may, somewhat understandably, defend these actions. But here’s the problem... What do we do when, because of legal precedent, these tactics are used on us? We may, sometime soon, be seen as enemies of the state - because we don’t support gay marriage or whatever else they have coming down the pipeline.

Bottom line is that if this is used against us, it won't be because of the finer points of the law, but because they've gained dictatorial powers via a coup, and control all the security services.