Are we becoming a police state?

[Junkmanme]

Quote:
Point well-taken. AND, I agree.

But, furthermore, I believe that "our" politicians should:
1. Make sure that their proposals are NOT CONTRARY to our Constitution.
2. Take sufficient time and thought to analyze to "potentional" after-effects and responses to their legislative actions PRIOR to giving them their support. (Some "laws" merely defeat the whole purpose in the results they produce.)
3. Divorce themselves , as much as possible, from "emotional" considerations in favor of Statesmanlike considerations.
4. Under all circumstances, bear in mind that they are "Public Servants" and NOT "Public Dictators".

just my thinking on these matters. No doubt other people have differing opinions.

-Junkmanme-

 

[dacjohns]

I'm getting in this discussion about 10 pages back so please bear with me if these questions/comments have already been addressed.

Quote:
If there is a SWAT team breaking into your home I think you would be wise to not resist. Resisiting will get you killed. Being right doesn't do any good if you're dead.

Quote:
Could you please post some references backing that up. I find that hard to believe. Using that same logic/rule a flight attendant would not be able to do rescue breathing or clean up toilets if they were extremely soiled from someone that is sick. One of their responsibilities is safety of the passengers. That is not keeping passengers safe.



Q9, I have seen from your posts here and on other threads that you are well read. I seem to recall that you are also a teenager. I ask, how many other countries have you spent time in? If the USA is the only one then you really don't know what makes our country great. I also find your use of the spelling Amerika quite offensive but this is a free country so at least that right hasn't been taken away from you.

More later if I am so inclined.

 

[dacjohns]

Quote:
Isn't James Yee that officer that was an excellent soldier and officer and got booted over don't ask don't tell. How long before he gets his job back?

I haven't read the book nor did I closely follow the news at the time. My limited take on it is that he knew exactly what he was doing. He willingly disobeyed regulations and orders in order to make a point. He shafted himself.

 

[dacjohns]

Quote:
About 2006, give or a take a year, didn't the Supreme Court say it could be done?

 

[Junkmanme]

Quote dacjohns - "Q9, I have seen from your posts here and on other threads that you are well read. I seem to recall that you are also a teenager. I ask, how many other countries have you spent time in? If the USA is the only one then you really don't know what makes our country great. I also find your use of the spelling Amerika quite offensive but this is a free country so at least that right hasn't been taken away from you.

More later if I am so inclined.Unquote.

A different opinion: I think that Q9 use of the spelling "Amerika" is not only justified, but reasonable in that it is used "in context" to illustrate a point. BLIND ADHERENCE to the thought: "my Country, right or wrong" is what allowed the Nazis to control Germany prior to and including W W II.

It is the RESPONSIBILITY of Americans to continually assess the workings of the Government and correct it as much as possible (according to their views). THIS is what America has always been about.

-Junkmanme-

P.S. For good reasons, Thomas Jefferson feared Government Yet, as President...he, himself, conducted Governmental Affairs in manners contrary to our laws. It is something that goes along with the POWER inherent in Government. Of this, we must be WARY.
P.P.S. I am a Big Fan of Thomas Jefferson...but he was merely another Human. We make mistakes and choices. Sometimes it works out....such as the "Louisiana Purchase".

 

[Junkmanme]

Quote:
About 2006, give or a take a year, didn't the Supreme Court say it could be done?

dacjohn,

I would need to see a "citation" on such a decision. I have my doubts because such a "transaction" with a Private Developer on Eminent Domain acquired properties conflicts DIRECTLY with the portion of our Constitution which enables "Eminent Domain".

-Junkmanme-

 

[Junkmanme]

Quote:
About 2006, give or a take a year, didn't the Supreme Court say it could be done?

dacjohn,

I would need to see a "citation" on such a decision. I have my doubts because such a "transaction" with a Private Developer on Eminent Domain acquired properties conflicts DIRECTLY with the portion of our Constitution which enables "Eminent Domain".

-Junkmanme-

Article III, Part 3 of the Bill of Rights states:

Requisites of Eminent Domain
Necessity
Private property
Public use
Just compensation

Note: It must be a "Public Use". (and therefore cannot be transferred to Private Entities for Development.)

IF the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled otherwise, it has made a BASIC and serious ERROR.

-Junkmanme-

 

[punk-a-doodle]

Junkmanme, can't copy/quote on this, but in response to your reply to me at the top there, I actually largely agree. But even if I, or someone else, didn't, you left room for input and discussion, didn't make broad assumptions, or cut off any dissenting opinions. That right there is what I like to see.

But now you have opened the floodgates for Constitutional interpretation, haha.

 

[Junkmanme]

Quote:
THANK YOU, punk-a-doodle, for the very KIND and undoubtedly true (Ha-Ha)COMPLIMENT !!!

"Opening the Floodgates" for Constitutional Interpretation...is what "discussion" IS all about, perhaps.

I'll align myself closely with a "restrictive" interpretation...such as we might have received from Robert Bork...had he actually made it to the Supreme Court.

But, it is only one man's opinion....out of approx 300 million Citizens.

Ha-Ha !!!

We learn from each other.

-Junkmanme-

 

[Happy Chooks]

Quote:
If there is a SWAT team breaking into your home I think you would be wise to not resist. Resisiting will get you killed. Being right doesn't do any good if you're dead.

Except in this case, there is a group of home invasion robbers posing as SWAT team and rob them. Jose's wife's family had been hit by this group. He was merely trying to protect his family and they fired 70 shots into him. Like it takes 70 rounds to subdue him? Then to refuse to let the paramedics treat him when they were on scene? And to top it all off most of the SWAT team in that area are ex military and all paramedic trained. They purposely let him die.