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

Skip to comments.

Your papers, please
The Washington Times ^ | February 23, 2004 | House Editorial

Posted on 02/23/2004 6:28:51 AM PST by xsysmgr

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:41:19 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Next week the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case to decide whether or not all Americans must have identification on them at all times. The case has been brought by a cowboy in Nevada who was asked to show ID while he was leaning against his pickup truck on the side of the road near his ranch. The police officer did not offer any specific reason why he demanded proof of identity. Having committed no crime, Dudley Hiibel, the cowboy, refused -- and was arrested. He was later convicted for "Delaying a Peace Officer." In America, still a free country, citizens should not be required to provide identification papers at any whim of the authorities.


(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: billofrights; nationalid; privacy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500501-519 next last
To: cinFLA
I understand. It is sort of like if I posted that at one time there was slavery in the US and he would respond that I was a racist slave-owning kook.
461 posted on 02/24/2004 1:12:20 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 457 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
I don't see your contention.

Just pointing out that tpaine's statement doesn't mean he's not familiar with the Barron decision. That's all.

462 posted on 02/24/2004 1:14:45 PM PST by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
Just pointing out that tpaine's statement doesn't mean he's not familiar with the Barron decision. That's all.

In the context of the post, it indicates otherwise. Of course that was his intent; to bait me on gun control.

Sort of like my saying there was once slavery in the US and when asked for proof provide copies of slave ownership documents AND THEM BEING ACCUSED OF BEING SYMPATHETIC TO RESORING SLAVERY IN THE US.

463 posted on 02/24/2004 1:18:32 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
Just pointing out that tpaine's statement doesn't mean he's not familiar with the Barron decision. That's all.

Of course not. What it means is that he wanted me to think he was not familiar with it.

464 posted on 02/24/2004 1:19:50 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith; tpaine
Changing the subject...

There's an interesting debate about the Ninth Amendment that's been spreading around some law blogs. You guys might like it. It's great reading, imo.

Start here if you're inclined to check it out.

465 posted on 02/24/2004 1:20:23 PM PST by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
You then made the incorrect inference that his statement was a denial of Barron.

Are you now saying that the 1833 decision did NOT include the 2nd?

466 posted on 02/24/2004 1:21:20 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 456 | View Replies]

To: Sandy; _Jim; cinFLA
The real test of a jackboot licker is this:

List some unenumerated rights.

A true blue jackboot licking Drug Warrior will return a blank page. For extra credit, ask them to provide the constitutional basis for the ATF, and ask how it differs from the "constitutional basis" of the EPA, OSHA, and the whole list of other post New Deal anti-constitutional abominations.

Scratch police enthusiast deep enough and you will find one of FDR's komrades.
467 posted on 02/24/2004 1:29:27 PM PST by eno_ (Freedom Lite - it's almost worth defending)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 465 | View Replies]

To: eno_
The real test of a jackboot licker is this:

The real test of an anarchist is to have him list any laws that he may favor. ZIP. Of course his constant ranting, name calling and distortions also tend to give him away.

468 posted on 02/24/2004 1:32:24 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 467 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
I keep asking. Is it your contention that the 2nd is NOT part of the BOR's?
469 posted on 02/24/2004 1:33:16 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
Changing the subject...

Why not answer some of the questions ON the subject.

470 posted on 02/24/2004 1:34:12 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 465 | View Replies]

To: eno_
The real test of a jackboot licker is this:

Oh joy, more name calling.

THANKS for letting all of us know who you really are: DUh material.

"Unable to make substantive response you impugn those you are at odds with."

Great show eno_!

What more do you have for us?

471 posted on 02/24/2004 1:41:40 PM PST by _Jim ( <--- Ann C. and Rush L. speak on gutless Liberals (RealAudio files))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 467 | View Replies]

To: eno_
The real test of a jackboot licker is this:

The real test of an anarchist is that "jackboot licker" is his favorite phrase.

472 posted on 02/24/2004 1:47:02 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 467 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA; _Jim
The real test of an anarchist is to have him list any laws that he may favor. ZIP. Of course his constant ranting, name calling and distortions also tend to give him away.

I would be perfectly happy with the set of laws we had pre-New Deal and pre-Prohibition, along with the same levels of taxation and regulation, and the same ratio of government spending to GDP. Do you know what they called people who were against the New Deal? Republican.

Since I gave you a straight answer. How about you give me one: How many cabinet-level departments and all the laws related to then do you think are anti-constitutional? How many FLEOs is enough? And how about those unenumerated rights?

473 posted on 02/24/2004 1:49:08 PM PST by eno_ (Freedom Lite - it's almost worth defending)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 468 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
Why not answer some of the questions ON the subject.

Because your question is absurd. "Is it your contention that the 2nd is NOT part of the BOR's?" WTF? The fact that you infer such a contention from any of my comments shows that you have a serious reading comprehension problem and that any discussion with you would be futile. Take a hike.

474 posted on 02/24/2004 1:55:17 PM PST by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 470 | View Replies]

To: eno_
How many FLEOs is enough?

Is your *real* answer to crime (and the criminal element) the same as John F'ing Kerrys is to terrorism in the world: "We'll negotiate with them and let the UN handle it"?

IF so, fergit it.

Ever watch John Walsh's America's Most Wanted? There are some REAL bad guys out there - in case you haven't noticed ...

AND who would handle domestic terrorism surveillance?

The postal service?

475 posted on 02/24/2004 2:05:27 PM PST by _Jim ( <--- Ann C. and Rush L. speak on gutless Liberals (RealAudio files))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 473 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
Perhaps earlier 'familiarity' instead of 'denial' was used. Too much flaming for me to look at it all.

Thanks, "Owen" is holding the line rather well I think.

It's a shame that Bork is always misquoted when the Ninth is discussed.
He said it is no better than an "ink blot" as to what the unenumerated rights were- not that the Ninth is no better than an ink blot.
Until Snopes debunks it as an urban legend I guess he'll always be misunderstood.

476 posted on 02/24/2004 2:09:04 PM PST by mrsmith ("Oyez, oyez! All rise for the Honorable Chief Justice... Hillary Rodham Clinton ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies]

To: _Jim
How about answering the question: How many armed federal agents is enough?

How much of the federal government is coloring outside constitutional lines? Any of it?

Are you happy with the ATF and its record?

I answered with a clear description of the kind of federal government I want. It was the mainstream Republican point of view in pre-New Deal America that that is how it should be. So tell us all: How many FLEOs should be fired tommorow in the process of returning us to a constitutional republic?
477 posted on 02/24/2004 2:24:38 PM PST by eno_ (Freedom Lite - it's almost worth defending)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 475 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
Too much flaming for me to look at it all.

No kidding. How come the bloggers can manage to have such an in depth back-and-forth--with major disagreements--without a flame war breaking out?

478 posted on 02/24/2004 2:31:59 PM PST by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 476 | View Replies]

To: eno_
How about answering the question: How many armed federal agents is enough?

How is a reasonable number to be arrived at - are you fishing for something out of thin air? A guess? A pie-in-the-sky 'dreamland' nirvana where all crooks have been magically beamed off the planet? A statement that can be later used against me - what?

I don't think that you have a) any basis, whether empirical or theoretical, for a number either and b) DON'T have any clear or even foggy idea of just what the duties and functions are of these federal employees is on a daily basis, duties that keep an active and alive and ever-presnt criminal element at bay ...

To that end, I don't think you have *any* practical, real-life ideas about dang near anything save an oft displayed (but rarely vocalized) don't tread on me for any reason attitude; an antisocial attitude that is fine were you living on an island all by yourself where no demands are likely to be placed upon your time or assets ever ...

479 posted on 02/24/2004 2:45:12 PM PST by _Jim ( <--- Ann C. and Rush L. speak on gutless Liberals (RealAudio files))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 477 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
flame war

More like a cinflagration.

480 posted on 02/24/2004 2:47:21 PM PST by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 478 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500501-519 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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