Connecting the War on Guns & Drugs [my title]

SHOTGUN NEWS ^ | 1/11/03 | Amicus Populi

[Texaggie79]

KEWL!! Never seen that one. Gotta cut and paste that baby to my favs.

[Texaggie79]

Law? Are you having trouble understanding? It doesn't require a LAW. This is the structure of our country. There needs to be no LAW to say that you don't COMPLETELY own your property. You NEVER bought em in the first place.

Let me think of an easy way to get this across to you....
If you COMPLETELY owned your property, explain how the government can take it away if you gain it through ill ways, or if you don't pay your taxes, or if they utilize Eminent Domain? All you own dcw, is certain RIGHTS to that property. Want to know what rights? Go to your courthouse and look them up.

[Texaggie79]

Cannot prevent, only punish? LMAO. Tell me tpaine, what is the purpose of punishment?

[tpaine]

Tell me tpaine, what is the purpose of punishment?
-aggie-

No sale. - You're gonna have to tell me sport; -- you must have some point, so cough it up.

Or, maybe you don't have a point? Hmmmm. - Veerry likely...

[tpaine]

"It is agreed by those who have seriously considered the subject, that no individual has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land, for instance.
By an universal law, indeed, whatever, whether fixed or movable, belongs to all men equally and in common, is the property for the moment of him who occupies it, but when he relinquishes the occupation, the property goes with it.
Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society." --Thomas Jefferson
533 Roscoe


KEWL!! Never seen that one. Gotta cut and paste that baby to my favs.
-aggie-

Don't get too excited, - in context, -- TJ was musing to his correspondent about how some indian tribes viewed real property. -

This out of context snippet just happens to ~appear~ to agree with your communitarian beliefs. -- Jefferson was no commie.

[Texaggie79]

Is punishment EVER used as a deterrent?

[tpaine]

Texaggie79
Tell me tpaine, what is the purpose of punishment? ---
--- Is punishment EVER used as a deterrent?
-aggie-

No sale. - You're gonna have to tell me sport; -- you must have some point, so cough it up.

Or, maybe you don't have a point? Hmmmm. - Veerry likely... Extreeemly likely...

[Texaggie79]

You have yet to answer the question. Has it ever dawned on you that punishment just might be for the exact purpose of deterrence?

[tpaine]

At 539, I made a comment, which you countered with a silly question:


Cannot prevent, only punish? LMAO. Tell me tpaine, what is the purpose of punishment?

543 posted on 01/23/2003 6:47 PM PST by Texaggie79 (seriously joking or jokingly serious, you decide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply
--To 539--

I responded with a reguest that you make a counterpoint, if you are able. -- It seems you are inable.
-- Which is NOT my problem. Please, do continue to make a fool of yourself, as its very amusing.

[Roscoe]

KEWL!! Never seen that one.

Jefferson, like all of the Founding Fathers, knew that law is the foundation of our rights as Americans. The juvenile mentalities on the thread can't comprehend that.

[dcwusmc]

You have gone beyond absurd. Yes, I am aware that, unless one insists otherwise and pays for them, different people can own different rights to the same piece of property. I am also aware that governments claim the authority to sieze one's land or property for non-payment of their levies. Which does NOT abrogate one's otherwise absolute ownership of that property. They use a doctrine similar to a mechanic's lien. And WRT any other siezure of property, absent a judgement of a court, such is done in a totally Unconstitutional manner. It does NOT mean you do not own your property; it only means that your rights are routinely violated by government minions. Which seems to set really well with you and the roscoe-bot.

[Texaggie79]

Refuse to go read the rights you own? Afraid it will disappoint you too much to see that it is not really the property you own, rather, certain rights to it?

As one, whos career consists of appraising real estate, I can tell you that I only appraise the RIGHTS one possesses to their property.

Want to know the difference? I'm holding a pen in my hand. I bought this pen. It is my private property. I can do with it, what I wish. I can use it, break it, burn it, or what have you. Land, I cannot own as private property. I cannot do whatever I wish with it. I may only do what I rights to do. I cannot possess the right to destroy my land. I cannot build upon, unless permitted by local zoning laws. I cannot extract minerals, unless I own mineral rights (which, BTW, does not mean that you OWN the minerals under your land, rather, you own the right to extract minerals from your land. For example oil. You own the right to EXTRACT oil from you land, even though the lake of oil may extend under someone elses land, you are still extracting from YOUR land, therefor you have the right to extract and use or sell it.).

[tpaine]

As one, whos career consists of appraising real estate, I can tell you that I only appraise the RIGHTS one possesses to their property.
"Want to know the difference? I'm holding a pen in my hand. I bought this pen. It is my private property. I can do with it, what I wish. I can use it, break it, burn it, or what have you."
________________________________

How confused & conflicted can you get, aggie?

'I bought this pen, 'joint', gun, whatever. It is my private property. I can do with it, what I wish. I can use it, break it, burn it, or what have you.'

Case closed as to your near terminal foot in mouth disease.

[Texaggie79]

One cannot own something as private property, if that something is illegal to own.

[tpaine]

As one, whos career consists of appraising real estate, I can tell you that I only appraise the RIGHTS one possesses to their property.

'I bought this pen, 'joint', gun, whatever. It is my private property. I can do with it, what I wish. I can use it, break it, burn it, or what have you.'
553 tpaine


One cannot own something as private property, if that something is illegal to own.
554 ta79

Are you contending that governments can make pens, guns, etc, 'illegal'? Why?

[Texaggie79]

Are you contending that governments can make pens, guns, etc, 'illegal'? Why?

People of states, cities, and or counties can prohibit that which is not guaranteed by the BoR and is viewed as a threat (i.e. violation of others rights).

[tpaine]

Life, liberty, and property are among the rights guaranteed, aggie. The type of property is not enumerated. See the 9th.

And, we have already disposed of your inability to discern a valid threat from your own fantasies.

[Texaggie79]

Therefore, you possess the constitutional right to own a vile of small pox in your home?

[First Amendment]

Dear tpaine, how 'bout this one for a start? (Sorry I couldn't accept your invitation until tonight - no internet all day today, and now I have a cut finger so it's really hard to type.) According to the author, this is equivalent to Drug Warriors (notice the caps) assaulting..... what amendment is that again? You know, the one that says something about the right to keep and ingest drugs? Hmmmmm, can't find it anywhere.

Please expain in simple layman's language why drug use and traffic should not be regulated and/or outlawed.

I guess to be fair, I should outline my position, which is quite different than the established one. Actually I did post it on this thread earlier, but here are the essentials:

1.No selling of drugs, or, to be fair, liquor. Heavy punishment, should include public corporal punishment such as caning, since jail time is not a deterrant, is expensive, and public caning (for instance) is much more humane and rational.

2. People should be allowed to grow marijuana (and poppies for opium if they can or want to) and use it themselves freely. Also brew their own liquor freely and use it themselves.

[First Amendment]

PS - I think I made a mistake, I didn't post anything on this thread... I 'll read it tomorrow.