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

To: Randi Papadoo
Who has reason to dislike this new ruling besides people who handle or use illegal drugs? That wouldn't be you, now, would it?

That is the oldest, most worn-out -- and most incorrect -- cliche in the world.

I am a proud member of Narcotics Anonymous. I'm coming up on my second 'birthday'. I despise drugs, because I personally have seen what they can do to a person.

But what I despise just as much as drugs, and perhaps a little bit more than them, is the abrogation of the Bill of Rights. The War on Drugs has diluted or destroyed most of our guaranteed freedoms, and now it appears that the rights of a person to be secure in his person, home, papers and effects is under extreme assault.

Power and authoritarianism, fascist control and unyielding government are also addictive, and have a druglike effect on those who wield it.

I might rightly observe that you and your kind, who have little concern for rights but who place all trust in the Omniscient and Omnipotent State, are the TRUE ADDICTS in this equation.

588 posted on 01/25/2005 4:35:28 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 586 | View Replies ]


To: Randi Papadoo; Lazamataz
Hi Randi-

Posted by Randi Papadoo:
"...Who has reason to dislike this new ruling besides people who handle or use illegal drugs? That wouldn't be you, now, would it?..."

Response by Lazamataz:
"...I might rightly observe that you and your kind, who have little concern for rights, but who place all trust in the Omniscient and Omnipotent State, are the TRUE ADDICTS in this equation..."


Randi, please read all of Lazamataz's cogent and accurate commentary in this thread before tossing absurd statements like that into the discussion.

The fact-of-the-matter is that this is death by a thousand bee stings. It's easy to build societal support to rail against thieves, drug dealers, pedophiles, and terrorists, etc. This then sets the stage for video cameras in public areas "for the protection of you and your children" as you go about your day.

Afterwards, it is decided that known gunowners driving about are problematic. Subsequently, why even allow people potentially inclined to criminal behavior to leave their homes when we can send police, sniffer dogs, and scanners? Wait, gunowners shouldn't be allowed to transport firearms off their property, either, they could become criminals, too...

Do you see where this is going yet? As mentioned by others earlier, it's all about incrementalism and the inability of many "law-abiding" people to notice...until they themselves are eventually ensnared in the relentless dragnet.

~ Blue Jays ~

605 posted on 01/25/2005 6:26:22 AM PST by Blue Jays (Rock Hard, Ride Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 588 | 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