Skip to comments.
Connecting the War on Guns & Drugs [my title]
SHOTGUN NEWS
^
| 1/11/03
| Amicus Populi
Posted on 01/11/2003 10:15:11 AM PST by tpaine
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280, 281-300, 301-320 ... 741-748 next last
To: Roscoe
Nothing about slamming smack in there.
Nothing about not slamming smack in there either.
I like your statements too.
To: philman_36
Tell me, Texaggie79, what reason would the founders give for not protecting the smoking of crack by private citizens?
"Some form of limitation on spirits has been part of this continent's history since the first European settlers arrived. Originally, these limitations were imposed to prevent drunkenness among the colonists."The Making of Prohibition
282
posted on
01/16/2003 7:41:36 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: Libertarian Billy Graham
Whether he is a knavish Bootlegger promoting narco-terrorism for profit or a duped Baptist committing narco-crimes in the name of false "morality," the lesson in personal responsibility that Roscoe will be taught at the Final Judgement will be the same. Unless they repent and ask the victims of their crimes for forgiveness, both knaves and dupes will pay for their crimes in the Lake of Fire. The theology of a pipe worshipper?
283
posted on
01/16/2003 7:43:22 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
I always thought it was: "They that can give up the liberty to smoke crack to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
284
posted on
01/16/2003 8:35:22 AM PST
by
Texaggie79
(seriously joking or jokingly serious, you decide)
To: philman_36
None, because that person hasn't any property rights to sacrifice. That person is living on other's properties and must obey the law of those properties anyway.
285
posted on
01/16/2003 8:37:24 AM PST
by
Texaggie79
(seriously joking or jokingly serious, you decide)
To: philman_36
Tell me, Texaggie79, what reason would the founders give for not protecting the smoking of crack by private citizens? hmm... perhaps the same reasons they didn't protect witchcraft in their own state. They saw it as a direct threat, and therefore a violation of other's rights.
286
posted on
01/16/2003 8:39:20 AM PST
by
Texaggie79
(seriously joking or jokingly serious, you decide)
To: tpaine; dcwusmc; Texaggie79; Roscoe; philman_36
"It's a form of 'democratic communitarianism', -- but aggie insists it is 'constitutional conservatism'.
-- His denial of political reality seems to be getting worse."
Unfortunately, the sheeple have surrendered their God-given rights guaranteed by the USC voluntarily to contract with the JBTs every since Lincoln took control of the Republic.
This societal "denial of political reality" is the true equation that has the brought the USA step by JBT step to the tyranny that Amerika is today.
Uncontrolled immigration, flooding us with sheeple who have no vested interest in the USC, coupled by a long standing animosities between the North and South, has given us citizens that not only do not respect the God-given rights of others, they don't respect their own.
287
posted on
01/16/2003 9:07:34 AM PST
by
TaZ
(Amerika; Land of the sleaze, home of the knave...)
To: TaZ
Amerika The cult can't conceal its hatred for America.
288
posted on
01/16/2003 9:23:11 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: dcwusmc; tpaine
"Yes, well, roscoe's positions on this rather remind me of that old saying about a politician (or in his case, JBT) being like a dead fish in the moonlight, "shining and stinking at once." And we know that gun-grabbers and WODDIES both perform best in the dark because they abhor daylight which would expose their actions for what they are: CRIMES committed on AMERICAN CITIZENS by their own national (and state) government..."
The average Amerikan citizen seems to be little shaken by the tyranny performed in broad daylight at Ruby Ridge and Waco, President Klintoon performing adultry with young interns in the so-called White House, and the actual REALITY of events that led up to and contributed to the destruction of the WTC on 9-11...
No, I believe the average Amerikan citizen is quite comfortable holding his nose and giving his support to the "politician (or in his case, JBT) being like a dead fish in the moonlight", which are presently the only options available from the corrupt two-party regime that controls the Hollywood-esque political rhetoric spewed forth for entertainment-only purposes (e.g. Rush Limbaugh, Phil Donohue, etc...).
The reality of today is that God has been pronounced dead, either in the hearts and/or minds of the Amerika sheeple, and to fill that void the almighty "State" has become the only supreme-being worthy of the Amerikan sheeples adoration, worship and tithes (X5).
289
posted on
01/16/2003 9:23:57 AM PST
by
TaZ
(Amerika; Land of the sleaze, home of the knave...)
To: TaZ
Amerikan citizenThe cult can't conceal its hatred for American citizens.
290
posted on
01/16/2003 9:26:01 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
"The cult can't conceal its hatred for America."
Au contraire, my poor bind puppet, I truly love and mourn the loss of America...a country my forefathers fought to establish, protect and preserve.
Hate is a strong word and emotion, which has no place in my heart or in my mind.
291
posted on
01/16/2003 9:29:16 AM PST
by
TaZ
(Amerika; Land of the sleaze, home of the knave...)
To: TaZ
False. Your posts drip with your hatred for our nation and its citizens.
All because they disagree with you about dope.
292
posted on
01/16/2003 9:33:09 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
Cult (Merriam-Webster definition #5)
"Great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work: such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad: a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion."
Yep, by this definition those of us who love the un-perverted US Constitution could be most readily described by athiest, statist and all other JBT loving sheeple in any sovereign state of tyranny.
293
posted on
01/16/2003 9:40:27 AM PST
by
TaZ
(Amerika; Land of the sleaze, home of the knave...)
To: TaZ
JBT loving sheepleThe cult can't conceal its hatred for America or its citizens.
Dope über alles.
294
posted on
01/16/2003 9:43:12 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
"False. Your posts drip with your hatred for our nation and its citizens.
All because they disagree with you about dope."
Did I say anything about dope?
Personally, I don't even drink and have not been intoxicated for over 17 years.
I have no use at all for drugs, alcohol or brain-washing...that does not give me the God-given right to tell you how to live now does it?
Nevermind, I forgot I was talking to a unthinking bot.
295
posted on
01/16/2003 9:43:48 AM PST
by
TaZ
(Amerika; Land of the sleaze, home of the knave...)
To: TaZ
Connecting the War on Guns & Drugs [my title] First the venomous hatred, now the pretense.
296
posted on
01/16/2003 9:47:12 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
Nothing about slamming smack in there. Don't confuse our Constitution with one of the Libertarian Party's endless press release rants
Excuse me, but doesn't Thomas Jefferson cover this in the federalist papers?
If memory serves me correctly, you can not make a law taking a right to do anything away. Wasn't this part of the debate on legislating morality?
I'm an old fart, out of school for decades, so maybe you can set me straight on this.
Do we have the right to live our life our own way, or must we accept the dictates of your king?
To: radioman
Thomas Jefferson cover this in the federalist papers? Which federalist paper did Thomas Jefferson write?
298
posted on
01/16/2003 10:05:06 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: Texaggie79
Why, tpaine, does the BoR give a REASON in the 2nd amendment? Do you think, perhaps, because it is not some arbitrary right they are spouting off, but a necessary right that we must have protected, in order to enjoy true protection of our liberty? The intent of your question puzzles me aggie. Have I ever given the impression that the RKBA's is just some 'arbitary' right? -- Are any rights capricious or discretionary [arbitrary] in your view? Again, - you reveal a strange attitude toward rights with your use of that word.
Tell me, paine, what reason would the founders give for protecting the smoking of crack by private citizens?
The same they would have given for the smoking of tobacco, I have no doubt. -- And, -- I think they'ed have thought you a very strange person for even implying that the state should have power to prohibit the smoking of ANYthing. ,
299
posted on
01/16/2003 10:24:56 AM PST
by
tpaine
To: Roscoe
"Tell me, Texaggie79, what reason would the founders give for not protecting the smoking of crack by private citizens?"
"Some form of limitation on spirits has been part of this continent's history since the first European settlers arrived. Originally, these limitations were imposed to prevent drunkenness among the colonists."
The Making of Prohibition
282 -roscoe-
Thank you my boy, for showing us your true stripe as a socialistic prohibitionist.
Your agenda here is clear.
300
posted on
01/16/2003 10:29:44 AM PST
by
tpaine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280, 281-300, 301-320 ... 741-748 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson