Eschew tyranny. Support the US Constitution Party.
1 posted on
12/27/2003 3:13:33 PM PST by
jimkress
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40 next last
To: jimkress
Support the US Constitution Party Support nutjobs...
2 posted on
12/27/2003 3:17:39 PM PST by
Drango
(Democratic fundraising....If PBS won't do it, who will?)
To: jimkress
Your conclusino is wrong. Bush is NOT a "CINO".
This illustrates more that this is what happens when you appoint a Democrat in the name of bipartisanship to even what seems at the time an unimportant position. Democrats only exist to do damage to the US and the Constitution.
To: jimkress
Here in NY, not wearing a seatbelt is already reason enough for the police to pull over your vehicle and I believe it also is acceptable as "probable cause" to search your car for drugs, firearms, or cash.
Very "conservative" of people to support a policy which is antithetical to the 4th, 9th and 10th Amendments to the US Constitution.
4 posted on
12/27/2003 3:22:50 PM PST by
bc2
(http://thinkforyourself.us)
To: jimkress
The Primary law gets them into your vehicle...its a win win situation....terrorists not wearing seat belts will be caught their vehicles searched and WMD they are carrying will be confiscated...
and millions of Americans will be safer...
Also the states can rake in lots of bucks for all the seat belt tickets..."other" goods they find can generate even more cash...leading all the way up to confiscation of one's property..
Of course bad cops can plant stuff and really do some damage...
Homieland security...wont close the borders profile terrorists or arm all commercial pilots train crews or bus drivers...but they will nail every single non seat belt wearing terrorists....
You can take that to the bank....anyway somebody can....
6 posted on
12/27/2003 3:24:29 PM PST by
joesnuffy
(Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
To: jimkress
allow police to stop and cite motorists solely for failing to wear a seat belt.
------------------------
Bridging over the dangerous transition of necessity to prove probable cause to interfere into the lives of citizens versus frivoulous or arbitrary, even whimsical, intrusion into one's life. Telescreens in our homes will be next.
8 posted on
12/27/2003 3:26:06 PM PST by
RLK
To: jimkress
I would prefer they burn the $400 million rather than use it for this. The seat belt laws we currently have are only about money anyway.
9 posted on
12/27/2003 3:26:44 PM PST by
microgood
(They will all die......most of them.)
To: jimkress; Starwind
William A. Niskanen is chairman of the Cato Institute... One of my favorite economists.
11 posted on
12/27/2003 3:27:33 PM PST by
Paleo Conservative
(Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
To: jimkress
The Constitution Party looks better with each passing day. Not too much difference between the republicans and democrats.... I think it's rather humorous that the majority of posters here think that GW is going to win the 2004 race by a landslide. They had better think again. There's enough of us that are thoroughly disgusted with the rampant social programs being boosted by the current administration. Unless things change in the next 10 months I'll stay at home on election day...many other conservatives will do the same. No offense folks, GW ain't no conservative.
To: jimkress
Support the US Constitution Party.I'm there.
16 posted on
12/27/2003 3:33:49 PM PST by
Old Fud
To: jimkress
This copy of the Constitution must be out of date. Does anyone have the current version, the one the government is using?
To: jimkress
i don't agree with the law and very seldom ware one. some times on tne highway to town (75 miles) but it is a way to pull a "bad guy" over and check him out.
21 posted on
12/27/2003 3:48:12 PM PST by
camas
To: jimkress
Election 2000
Republican- 50,459,624
Democrat- 51,003,238
Green- 2,882,995
Reform- 449,120
Libertarian- 384,440
Other- 232,922
I hate Bush, imagonna(imagoner) vote for the "Other" party.
To: nopardons
PING -- in case you feel like having a fruitless discussion with Dean supporters...
To: jimkress
The Air Traffic system in this country has deteriorated to an almost 3rd World level and Minetta can't find anything useful to do with his time.
SO9
To: jimkress
The Air Traffic system in this country has deteriorated to an almost 3rd World level and Minetta can't find anything useful to do with his time.
SO9
To: jimkress
Bill Niskanen, who is a friend of mine and someone I highly respect, has allowed his philosophies to lead him astray in this article. Here are the factual reasons why:
As I know from reading, and as a friend of mine who did his residency at the Shock Trauma Unit of Maryland Hospital is well aware, motorcyclists who do not wear helments, and auto drivers who do not wear seat belts, are at the highest risk of coming out of an accident alive but brain dead. And given the capacity of modern medicine to keep such "vegetables" alive for a long time, this is an expensive proposition.
Those who suffer such injuries in accidents are, in more than half of the cases, financially incapable of paying for the costs of that long-term, expensive treatment. So, who pays for those costs? It is the taxpayers who support the institutions who treat these patients.
If it were true that irresponsibility by drivers caused harm only to themselves, I would agree entirely with Bill's article. But when other people's irresponsibilities give them financial claim on my assets, and the assets of all other taxpayers, we then have a right to tell these drivers what they have to do, to PREVENT THEM FROM RAIDING OUR WALLETS.
Philosophies are good, as far as they go. But every now and then, stark reality should rear its ugly head. And on this issue, the practical concerns amount to upward of a million dollars or more, for each rider or motorist who winds up in futile intensive care for two years or more.
Therefore, Bill is wrong on this issue, for factual, not philosophical reasons.
Congressman Billybob
Click here to stick a thumb in the eye of CFR, "Hugh & Series, Critical & Pulled by JimRob."
60 posted on
12/27/2003 4:27:08 PM PST by
Congressman Billybob
(www.ArmorforCongress.com Visit. Join. Help. Please.)
To: jimkress
Okay, I give up. What is a CINO?
66 posted on
12/27/2003 4:31:19 PM PST by
Free2Be49
(A wise man's heart inclines him toward the right, but a fool's heart toward the left. Ecc. 10:2 RSV)
To: jimkress
There sure seem to be a lot of kool-aid drinkers defending pubbies on this thread. Thanks for t epost. It's just another reason not to choose socialist party B.
80 posted on
12/27/2003 4:44:54 PM PST by
zeugma
(The Great Experiment is over.)
To: jimkress
Yes, let's abandon Bush over a trivial seat belt law. You really have your head screwed on straight. This is a financial measure since people not wearing seat belts would get injured, incur huge hospital bills, and it would drive insurance prices up. Sometimes they weren't even insured. I'd rather pay less for insurance rather than having to pay more for someone else's lack of responsibility.
81 posted on
12/27/2003 4:45:00 PM PST by
jagrmeister
(I'm not a conservative. I don't seek to conserve, I seek to reform.)
To: jimkress
Have they really thought this through?
I didn't know we lived the era of Hitler's Germany.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson