Replies

Why don't 16 (or 2) year olds vote? Drink? Drive? Own guns?

It's because if you do not have the requisite judgment to exercise your rights RESPONSIBLY, you are denied them. That is why if you misuse your rights -- at any age -- you can be stripped of your rights.

Rights and responsibility cannot be separated.

But, to take one of your points that I do agree with . . .

If rights are inalienable then how can you so frivolously take them away from people in order to 'take down drunks' when 98 of 100 that you want stopped are not guilty of anything? What's your position on guns in the hands of us ordinary (non government officials) people? Do you approve of that inalienable right? Or are you a 'reasonable restriction' kind of guy? Should 2 or 16 year olds be able to vote?

I know that my existence bothers you, but try to answer these questions.

Ray....let me help you to understand this......Amendments to the Constitution to reflect changes in Society. For instance....2 year olds cannot buy guns via amended law but they certainly are not restricted Constitutionally from owning guns given to them.

Drinking laws are state laws tacked onto exactly ZERO DIRECT reference to the Constitution......you, Ray have EXACTLY ZERO mandated or noted right in the Constitution to drink either. The Constitution does not cover the minutiae of life such as whether certain people can or can't drive cars or own guns. Someone could challenge drinking laws if they so choose and it would be up to the courts to render their decision based on the courts interpretation of other laws, etc... and couple that with their interpretation of the interest of societies well being.

"Rights and responsibility cannot be separated."

False.....a 2 year old has Constitutional rights....heck a 2 hour old has those same rights and they have ZERO responsibility to anyone or anything to maintain those rights.

Are you just so dense you cannot see that fact? Does it help if I add in the word "basic" just so you don't go off on some tangent about criminals losing their rights or something else????

"...how can you so frivolously take them away from people in order ....when 98 of 100 that you....."

Gee Ray, I though I was clear that I view the C/P as no more an inconvenience as a long stoplight. You view being asked "have you had anything to drink tonight" as a strip search. Talk about losing perspective. I bet all of us have gone through these at some time and just a few of you with history or attitudes just pass right thru. Just like the stoplight. Since you see some nefarious intent I'm just curious if you have driven on Interstate hiways (and many State hiways as well) and noted the little cameras mounted on light standards. THIS intrusion of privacy scares me ....... but yet you whine about investigative tactics used to combat a very deadly problem. As for the 98% (and I can't recall where you came up with that figure so who knows if it is accurate at all.....considering the reporting source as you I question it on it's face...but do provide that if you wish to continue using that number)...where was I?..as for the 98%, their rights are "infringed" upon in a far lesser way than the passengers being led out of the plane in Florida last week were infringed on by being detained and finally having to obey the officers commands and come out of the plane single file with hands on head.

All LEGAL tactics and alot more embarrassing than a moment at a checkpoint!!!!!!!!!

I'm really getting tired of reiterating NINE FRICKEN ways how absurd your contentions are so just deal with it!!!!

"What's your position on guns in the hands of us ordinary (non government officials) people?"

Well, this is not the thread topic but I assume you refer to the Wackcase bird militia member and his comment re: 2nd Amend rights.

NRA member and appropriately armed, Ray. So do you believe it should be ok for the general public to carry a 45 into the White House? Senate Chambers? Commercial Aircraft (I personally have no problem with carrying on any Public Conveyance other than planes due to the catastrophic damage which could occur if the plane's fuselage is breached)? If a 45 is ok how about a SAR? Or maybe an rpg?
Where might be the limit if any? Really Ray, I don't mean this facetiously..I doubt you have a legal SAR or RPG..are there any limits?

I've got to look into the other guys stuff tonight so I'm not going to spend time on you.

"I know that my existence bothers you,..." No Ray, really your existence doesn't bother me at all.......you just need reforming......and you are a fine little project:)