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

To: NutCrackerBoy; tpaine
Why do we mistrust the state, but trust the feds?

Ah, but the point is, I don't trust either of them. The feds have vast resources with which to screw with me, if they choose, and the locals are here in my face, up close and personal, allowing them to screw with me in ways that the feds can't, if for no other reason than that I am far more likely to go unnoticed by Congress than by the local sheriff. The feds are immensely powerful, but they are far away. The locals are somewhat less potent, but I am far more likely to encounter the minor demons they represent than I am to run afoul of the arch-fiends in Washington. The next time you have to stand in line for two hours at the DMV, remember that it's not Congress, generally speaking, who's making you waste your valuable time like that.

And that's sort of the point of making the Bill of Rights binding upon all state actors, at every level. "Inalienable" rights that can be violated and are unrecognized by the very people you are most likely to need their protections against are, as a practical matter, worthless. Ask tpaine - he'll be happy to tell you how your "inalienable" right to keep and bear arms is entirely "alienable" if you happen to live in California, or New York City, or Washington DC, or a host of other places. And an "inalienable" right that you can't actually exercise is purely a theoretical construct - it no longer has any practical relevance to your life or the way you live it.

31 posted on 11/15/2003 1:59:46 PM PST by general_re (Me and my vortex, we got a real good thing....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: general_re; NutCrackerBoy; yall
Well said general.. I can only add:

__________________________________

NutCrackerBoy:
Why do we mistrust the state, but trust the feds?
29





Who here trusts either?
Our mistrust is supposed to be part of the check/balance system.

Instead, party politics has subverted that C&B system to the point that one socialistic republocrat group with two opposing factions is in perpetual control.



36 posted on 11/15/2003 2:31:33 PM PST by tpaine (I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but FRs flying monkey squad brings out the Rickenbacker in me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: general_re
I see the first part, the devils all around you versus the far-away arch-fiends. But I don't quite see the second part.

... the point of making the Bill of Rights binding upon all state actors, at every level. "Inalienable" rights that can be violated and are unrecognized by the very people you are most likely to need their protections against are, as a practical matter, worthless.

I do see that California, big enough to be its own country, must have had a lousy set of founders if they haven't constitutionalized that a person's means of self-protection are inviolable. But what if I live in a state that has had more liberty-minded founders? Say it has an even more sharply drawn BOR than the US, what good would incorporation be to the folks in my state?

37 posted on 11/15/2003 2:31:39 PM PST by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

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