Was it Franklin who said that the government being founded was only sufficient for a particular, specific sort of citizen?
We were warned, long ago, none of this should be a surprise.
There are but two sources of order in society, individual self discipline, or government tyranny. Above all, there must be order, “nature abhors a vacuum”.
I am not surprised or confused by the state of affairs. Consider that some elements of our "society" demanded and enacted "zero tolerance" in the "public schools" for the most innocuous of possessions and those same groups are often the most vociferous in favor of lenient criminal penalties for adult criminals.
A rational thinker might insist that if there be any zero tolerance in a free society (my answer to those who think government should force compliance by limiting choice in the free market place by say, raising taxes to achieve a desired result, tax oil so we can have cheaper electric solar systems on our houses or say, banning SUV's so we conserve oil, forcing us into smaller vehicles, is always the same for any of their pet causes....What about Liberty?), is to insist on zero tolerance for adult repeat criminals who have shown that reform has not helped them become responsible citizens.
If you are willing to use government force, not reason, to gain your objectives, are you willing to accept the same use of government force by other individuals or groups of individuals to further their cause at your expense?
The blank stares this question gets speak volumes. Not much thinking goes into their reasoning.
I have a friend who likes to tow a small sailboat to various lakes on weekends and sail for recreation. Years ago we sailed together and had lots of fun.
His thinking began to change. He thought there should be a large increase on state and federal fuel taxes and stricter mileage requirements on auto manufacturers to conserve oil and promote alternative energy development and to provide tax breaks and rebates for those who can’t afford electric solar systems. I pointed out to him that he was free to pay as much fuel tax, above and beyond the pump tax, directly to the government as he wanted.
“Think gas should cost $6.00 a gallon like in Europe?” (Why do liberals generally seem to admire Europe?)
“Keep track of what you buy and send the government the difference, I said. You are free to do so. Want smaller cars? Trade in the truck you tow your boat with and buy a more efficient car.”
“While we are at it, if oil conservation and alternate energy is so important to you, sell your boat and stay home and ride a bike for fun. Why do you want to use the force of government to impose your thinking at the expense of others when you are not imposing those same restrictions on yourself.”
“What about Liberty, there friend? Why do you want others to pay for your ideas? Be a leader and set an example.”
“Remember that any rule you seek to impose on others can and will be used against you in someway.”
Several years ago he said thought 2nd Amendment is outdated and should be abolished.
I said, “Hey no problem, I’ll trade you that for Amendments 5 and 6, due process and equal protection, as long as the repeal applies only to citizens and not to government, like your denial of the 2nd does, and I’ll go gut a few known convicted serious criminals for fun and recreation and do it while walking to conserve fuel.”
“Oh, and maybe the first new conservation law will be that no one can use fuel to recreate anymore, so sailing on various lakes may be out for you.”
We haven’t talked much lately.