Posted on 12/20/2005 7:36:23 AM PST by JesseJane
Considering that terrorism is mostly a product of our politically-correct sense of restraint, weak-kneed politicians, and a namby-pamby media, plus the nanny state urge to emasculate good citizens, yes: terrorism would go away if we were better armed. How?
We had terrorists in 17th century in America. We weren't disarmed then. Terrorism ended with the terrorists on reservations, what few were left alive.
You are comparing Arabs living in Iraq to Americans living in the United States. That's absurd.
I have made this challenge 16 times and not ONCE have any of the Hysterics been able to provide a single instance of abuse of the Patriot Act. Note to Hysterics. ANY thing the Goverment does can be abused. To demand perfection before doing anything is infantile. Perfection cannot be achieved. Grow up you silly twits before you get MORE Americans killed with your infantile behavior.
Any law can be absued. To demand we not do anything because of what MIGHT happen is infantile.
You believe that arming every American would end terrorism?
Exlain to me why our armed forces get attacked by terrorists. Explain to me why arming every American in the WTC would have stopped the first attack?
You better start listening to Rush then. He thinks the Senator is a moron and this opposition to the Patriot Act the behavior of hysteric children.
I have listened to Rush. He is absent on Illegals and on this as well. He was on the run today as his credibility was calledn into question.
Further, tell me why TRUST ME I'm President Bush works for you? The borders are wide open.
You know, rubber stamping is wrong.. on any side. I fear you'd be in the crowd that cheers the current abuse of Eminent Domain.
So, please join the sheep at the cliff. That way to the oven
Remember the DC sniper? Which government agency made that stop?
Oh and BTW, perhaps you can tell me which Federal agency successfully stopped one of the 9/11 highjackings before hitting its target?
When were you born?
Apparently not behind the barn door.
Using Craig's standard NOTHING should ever be done by Government. It may be abused by some future government so we cannot do it! THAT is why the price of Liberty is eternal vigilance not eternal inertia! It was EXACTLY this hysteric mindset that created the Gorelick Wall. Sorry but the Constitution is NOT a suicide pack. The Anti-Goverment paranoia of the Baby Boomer's is childish. We ARE the Government. Government of, for and BY the people. It is not some sort of enemy grouping out to "get you". We are at War. Wake UP before you get MORE Americans killed with your rabid paranoia.
Well goodie, because this Californian opposes what the four did, starting with Chuck Hagel. Whenever his name is attached to something I am instantly suspicious. He could tell me the sun rose in the east this morning, and I would still check with an independent source.
I respect Craig and want to believe he did what he thought was right. However, the way Congress works, it's also possible he was holding his vote out for some piece of pork he wanted for his state and didn't get it. So he writes a rationale for his vote knowing he has to tell his constituents something. Who the heck knows what the truth is without reading the full details of the bill, and few of us do. He pushes a few hot buttons he knows will resonate with the right, gets the desired result and calls it a year.
In the meantime, thanks to the tools available to law enforcement in the Patriot Act, some Asian men were arrested earlier this year in Torrance near where I live, and they were indicted for trying to bring missiles into the country to sell to the higest bidder. Charming.
While I cherish civil liberties as much as the next American, I also cherish life and limb. So what I want to know is, did what Craig and the others do leave us more vulnerable to the machinations of nefarious individuals? I doubt very seriously that Craig, Hagel and the others would give me an honest answer.
You didn't answer how arming everyone eliminates the terrorism threat. It figures you would dodge the question.
Indeed, Hagel is an ambitious sleaze.
However, the way Congress works, it's also possible he was holding his vote out for some piece of pork he wanted for his state and didn't get it.
Unless you can establish that, your suspicions are no grounds for giving the Federal government access to gun purchase records. Hillary would download the entire file for de-facto national gun registration.
Who the heck knows what the truth is without reading the full details of the bill, and few of us do.
Craig makes the citations for you. Go look if you're so damned credulous.
He pushes a few hot buttons he knows will resonate with the right, gets the desired result and calls it a year.
Did I give blanket approval to Larry Craig?
In the meantime, thanks to the tools available to law enforcement in the Patriot Act, some Asian men were arrested earlier this year in Torrance near where I live, and they were indicted for trying to bring missiles into the country to sell to the higest bidder.
Did I say the entire Act needed to be tossed? Go find a strawman elsewhere.
While I cherish civil liberties as much as the next American, I also cherish life and limb.
So do I, which is why I cherish the Second Amendment.
I didn't say that it would. I said it was the best defense against terrorism. That doesn't preclude other measures.
You still haven't justified trashing the Second Amendment, as this measure clearly does. You still haven't answered which Federal agency caught the DC sniper. You still haven't answered the question which Federal agency brought down Flight 92 (there, I made it easy for you).
Our TRILLION dollar military couldn't bring down a single 9-11 highjacked plane but a group of committed citizens got it done and very probably saved the Capitol building, which apparently doen't mean much to you. That doesn't mean we don't need a military, it DOES mean that we're best off trusting our citizens to keep and bear arms. It DOES mean that provisions in law that violate that unalienable right to self defense are void and should not pass the Congress.
There is still time for the conference committe to dump those provisions and still get the PATRIOT Act renewed before it expires. You are whining about nothing.
Perhaps I have missed something, but my understanding is the Act has been, as you say, tossed. It has not been reauthorized by Congress. (Again, my understanding could be flawed since I haven't followed the details of this issue.)
As for the arrests of those Asians in Torrance, I hardly think a case in which individuals were trying to smuggle missiles into the country qualifies as a strawman. There have been multiple cases of terrorist cells being broken up here in the U.S. since 2001 thanks to the tools the Patriot Act gave law enforcement.
In the Clinton years, the United States was hit multiple times. The first WTC bombing, the bombings of our embassies in Africa, the USS Cole, the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, etc. Since 2001, there has been no repeat of any such attacks on American territory (which embassies and warships are), although we have been at war with them in Afghanistan and Iraq. Seems to me President Bush must be doing something right.
Let me put it this way. I trust him a whole heck of a lot more than I trust Hagel and anyone who votes with him against the President.
As for the 2nd Amendment, I am as strongly for its preservation as anyone here on FR. However, there are several other senators who are strong on gun rights. How come they didn't see the matter the same way Craig did?
As for Craig's citations, as I said the only way to be sure what's really in a bill is to read the entire thing. Craig may be telling the truth, or he may be cherry picking selected language. Often in these way-too-legalistically written bills, one clause or section is modified by another, and you have to trace through the entire subject in the bill to understand the full implications.
The very fact he felt the need to explain himself says to me he's getting heat from his constituents on his vote, and with good reason.
No. The Senate has filibustered the conference committe report already passed by the House. The conference committe could reconvene, delete the objectionable provisions, and submit a new report for approval by both houses. It's doable by the end of the year, if not a week or two after.
As for the arrests of those Asians in Torrance, I hardly think a case in which individuals were trying to smuggle missiles into the country qualifies as a strawman.
It does if you are using it to justify the government having unrestricted access to gun purchase records. Those records SHOULD NOT EXIST by the way, because they are supposed to be destroyed. That the government has failed to abide by the law in that instance is all the proof I need to assert that there is every likelihood this power will be abused.
Let me put it this way. I trust him a whole heck of a lot more than I trust Hagel and anyone who votes with him against the President.
I don't trust this President any more than I trust Upchuck Hagel. He took an oath of office to defend the Constitution and has totally refused to control our borders in time of war.
However, there are several other senators who are strong on gun rights. How come they didn't see the matter the same way Craig did?
It is highly likely that a good many of them didn't read the conference committee report.
The very fact he felt the need to explain himself says to me he's getting heat from his constituents on his vote, and with good reason.
Sure there is good reason. Limbaugh has been bashing away and I'd bet he hasn't read it either.
Thanks for fighting the good fight. Empowered, Constitutionally-protected citizens are our best defense.
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.