Posted on 01/27/2007 1:36:11 PM PST by tpaine
Not only are you making up words, now you're making up laws.
Post the law to back that restriction up.
"Sovereignty of the vehicle's interior belongs solely to the employee."
You're making a case for the right to steal from your employer.
Sovereignty to the contents of the land belongs solely to the person who owns it, and if that individual decides that the only way they will allow you access to their property if if you agree to your car being searched, then you either agree to that search, or turn away from the property.
Real simple...
Let's say that I own a company, and I have security guards posted at the entrance to its grounds.
There is a sign that advices you that in order for your vehicle to enter the property, you must agree to a search by the security guards, and that it will be searched again on the way out.
You approach the gate and refuse to let them search your vehicle, they refuse to grant you access.
End of story.
You have absolutely no right to be on someone else's property without their permission.
Have you now pulled your support for the 'gun-grabbing' GA bill?
--Honor has nothing to do with anything when citizens are pushed over the edge.--
He should never have bought the land if he didn't want them to use the easement. He wasn't "pushed". He just lost it.
Yeah, I'd be angry, too.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
--Post the law to back that restriction up.--
We could post the GA bill which you have said that you agree with but that isn't law yet.
"you called him insane, not me...."
"beyond rationality" intimates insanity.
one can surmise that the man who reacted so violently was subject to tyranny, the duration and intensity probably commensurate with the reaction.
--Red herring argument. Whether the yard was "flooded" or not, there was a leak (just in case you've never smelled a sewer leak, trust me, it's very obvious), it was the city's reposnsibility to fix it, and they didn't. --
Oh, it is ok to post false statements but when called on it shout "Red Herring" to the person that outs your false statement. Good debating tactic.
--there was a leak --
Did you make that up?
Now, a question to you: did you read the argument? A follow-up: wouldn't you be angry if you were in Mr. Watson's boots?
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
--one can surmise that the man who reacted so violently was subject to tyranny, the duration and intensity probably commensurate with the reaction.--
What tyranny. He bought a piece of property that included an easement. If he didn't like that easement, he should never have bought the property.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
The article says nothing about a leak or raw sewage so you must have made that up.
--I guess you've never smelled a sewer leak, have you?--
Yes. But what does that have to do with this except that you have made it up that there was a raw sewage leak.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Did Poland buy property with an easement prior to World War II? Did France? Did Ghengis Khan's mongol hordes riding bloody across the tundra have an easement? Did the Black Plague that swept across Europe have an easement?
Tpaine once wrote: "You ever read "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross?
Good example of 'my line'. -- A clear effort by our governments to deprive us of any of our fundamental individual rights would involve me in an insurrection or revolution."
Durasell, I have a question for you. You inferred in your post that when I or perhaps any of my fellow citizens become overly suspicious of the actions of government something will happen and a line will be crossed.
I tagged Tpaine so that he would, like me, be appraised of your answer to my question.
By now, you must be aware of the fact that this country was founded by a group of men who had just recently been involved in a rebellion against the government. This line thing intrigues me. Is it the moment in time where we as as citizens of this great nation embark upon another such adventure? Is what Garry Watson did just a precursor to what is to come?
I do not know and that is why I ask you.
Semper Fi
An Old Man
That's because the village blacksmith and the nice lady seamstress were not among the British troops. If they had been, they undoubtedly would have been shot at.
Using the Boston Tea Party as an analogy here was simply a poor choice on your part.
CA....
>>But killing these working men for "the principle" of the ability to act at will and without need for justification" is beyond rationality.<<
And that is what other people in the area said. They also said he was pushed.
One thing is for sure, if more people did it, we would all enjoy more freedom. In a real way, one could say he gave his life for our freedom.
Who is John Galt?
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.