Finger printing at traffic stops transplant

Notice the rate that our civil rights are being erroded has accelerated past two presidential terms ?


Funny but when I look at it who really does defend our civil rights ? The social conservatives that wrap themselves around the flag as they expout how they defend the constitution ? Perhaps it's the other beast that really defends our constitution and our civil rights. The left leaning liberals that are busy in court defending our civil rights.


Funny how social conservatives that wrap themselves in the flag are the one's destroying it's very meaning.

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

Agreed, but I'd say "accelerated" isn't a sufficient word. Unless your talking about "accelerated" in terms of the average NASA rocket. How 'bout "killed", "Raped, Maimed, Murdered, Obliterated".

But there again we disagree.... the Libs are busy in court driving us over the same cliff that the repubs are, just a different vehicle. They're not in it for us, they're in it for themselves just like the rest of 'em. Almost every single democrat congressman voted for the Patriot Act, most without even reading it...... They are NOT on our side.

Both sides now wish to disarm us and keep tabs on us. No matter which side the opression comes from, it's still opression.

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

The politicians who call themselves liberals, just go after different rights. And they go after them in different ways.

The alleged conservatives are fairly straight up, blatantly trampling our rights in the name of physical protection. Things like registering livestock, because they might carry diseases, or banning Coke cans on airplanes, because they might contain explosives. (the fact that I could swallow an explosive charge sufficient to bring down a 747, hasn't been brought up. Yet)

The alleged liberals, on the other hand, tend toward more long range approaches. Things like using schools to shape the values of children, and providing handouts, to promote dependency.

In actual practice, I've come to reject the idea that the two parties are really separate entities. Each exists only as a counter to the other. When one is perceived to have gone too far, the other becomes temporarily empowered to increase it's own particular type of controls, in a blind attempt to restore balance. Even if they're not working with each other, the two camps can (and do) bring us closer to totalitarianism than either could ever hope to by itself.

It all comes down to the illusion of choice. As long as they can convince enough people that they've actually chosen the direction of our government, they can continue to go in whichever direction they choose. Since the very nature of running for elected office all but requires a candidate to feel superior to his fellow man, almost all politicians are elitists. And the most fundamental definition of an authoritarian, is an elitist with power over others. With precious few exceptions, every election serves no other purpose than to empower one authoritarian over another.

In the words of the immortal Homer Simpson, "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos."
[media]http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=1638650[/media]
For the first time in my life, I see a candidate who ISN'T an authoritarian. The lesser of two evils is still evil. For once, let's not vote for evil.

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

I did say liberals not democrats. Most left leaning liberals hate the dems *almost* as much as they hate the reps. Left leaning liberals are looked at by the mainstream as a fringe hippie group. These are the same people that are constantly in court passionately defending the rights of you and me. These are the same people that constantly stick their necks (careers) out and often get it chopped off. They feel the same way you do. That neither party is doing what is best for the country and people.

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

"Lib not dem"... My bad.... then we do agree.

But let's not forget that besides the "hippies" on the left that really do stick their necks out for us, there are also "real patriots" on the right doing the same. No matter our political differences (left/right/conserv/lib) we have to recognize the true enemy.... the Fascist/Corporate government that we have now.

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

Hartage-

Before I go into a long winded explanation of why I think modern liberalism is uniquely responsible for today's growing police state, I'd like to hear your definition of modern liberalism. I find that most people, myself included, who support an ideology, tend to fill in any unknowns with their own opinions, in an attempt to maintain consistency. Likewise, those who oppose an ideology tend to fill in unknowns with the opposite of their beliefs, for the same reason. If you provide your own definition, I'll be better able to agree, or disagree with you on the actual terms we're discussing, as opposed to each of our own misconceptions.

To start, here's the basis of my political beliefs. Every action of the federal government must, in all circumstances, be explicitly authorized by the Constitution. Right or wrong, it's a legal contract, with clearly stated terms. Beyond that, my only addition comes from Thomas Jefferson.

Basically, I believe that government should have as little power as possible. True anarchy suits me just fine, but the Constitution doesn't allow it.

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

Well then in my definition of liberalism you might have more in common with hippies than you might think.


Liberalism to me is just that. You should be free to follow your own concience wherever it leads you so long as you do not adversely affect others. Nobody should be able to dictate to you what their core belifes are.

Example, you want your .50 automatic machine gun more power to you. Go to the range and shoot it safely. If rounds land in my front yard we have problems. Go use your .50 machine gun to turn your elk hunt into an elk grinder more power to you. If you accidentaly take out another hunter with a stray round then we have a problem. If you take out a whole heard of elk we have a problem. Go pray to buddah, allah, the trees, rocks or whatever or whomever you should be allowed. If you strap on a bomb in the name of your God and blow up my own, we have a problem.

I would much rather have increased freedom with increased responsibility of self and community.


With a flower power slant on it. If you want to marry 20 different women or just have kids with 20 different women more power to you. Just don't be out in public promoting something others don't belive in. Keep it inside your house.

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

Hartage-

I'll spare you from my rant about liberalism causing the growth of government power. What you describe isn't modern liberalism, it's classical liberalism. The modern name for that is libertarianism.

If that's your philosophy on life, I urge you to take a close look at those with whom you align yourself. Particularly on your example of machine guns, the modern liberals have consistently led the charge to ban them. And smoking. And fast food. And big cars. And incandescent light bulbs. (just banned, effective 2014)

They do, at times, fight for free speech. But at other times, they fight against it. Are you aware that California text books can no longer use words such as mother or father? They've been deemed offensive, and therefore, illegal. What is free speech, if it can be removed on the premise that someone MIGHT be offended?

Those who call themselves liberals have given us the welfare state, political correctness, social security, and racial quotas. They've institutionalized the concept that government should protect us from ourselves. They're making every effort to give us socialized medicine. And perhaps most importantly, those are the people who are trying to put the UN in charge of the entire world's economy, by way of environmental treaty. None of these policies are compatible with a free society.

My feeling is that this site is made up of mostly ex-republicans. The leadership of that party has abandoned it's traditional principals. I contend that you're in the same position. The values you hold were long ago purged from your party's leadership. Today, the elites of both parties exist only to advance government. And they do so by continually convincing us that, no matter how bad they are, the other party is worse. To argue whether one is worse than the other is like arguing whether Hitler was worse than Stalin. The only rational conclusion is that they both should have been shot.

Just curious. Why shouldn't I publicly promote something that others don't believe in? If my words carry no more authority than anyone else's, isn't it up to those who hear them to decide whether or not to listen?

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

I beg to differ. Hippies the source of the liberal movement are not into political correctness. They embraced going against the grain. That group is known for having the stick of political correctness beat them down by the mainstream social conservatives. They don't believe in government messing with people at all. They have formed remote enclaves just to get away from "the government" and mainstream society. Many of them believe and practice natural herbal medicine as a primary source of medical care. Regular medical help is both too expensive and too far away to be primary.

I spent a month in northern cal. Two weeks in one "hippie" ranch. They are totally off the grid both water and power are from streams. Restroom is an outhouse. Which might I add is done correctly it does not smell at all.

I digress.... Liberals at least these liberals just want to be left alone. Funny thing is when work needs to get done to maintain the ranch we all look the same. Some there were against guns.... until winter approached and the practicality of hunting as a means to supply meat cured them of that.

What you are describing to me do not sound like liberals. The liberals I know are content with just doing their thing and they will let you do yours.

Because nobody wants something unsolicited shoved down their throats. Publicly promoting something is SPAM and hated for the same reasons. If I am interested in snowboards I will seek out snowboard makers. I sure as hell don't want a snowboard maker on his soapbox at a street corner punishing my ears while I walk my dog.

The same with gays, goths, or wife beaters. I don't want to be exposed to two guys locking lips, some mansen looking freak, or the violence of a guy beating his wife as I walk my dog down the street. If they want to do such things in their own homes more power to them.

If my kid (hypothetical) is at school I sure as hell don't want him being taught about satanic worship, or celtic spirits or whatever. However I believe in God and "standard" Christian practice I am against religion in schools. What if the community I'm in has a majority of satan worshipers ?? If you let the Christian practice in school so must you let every other practice.

I digress again.... My philosophy is do as you see fit in your own homes or even in public as long as it does not affect me and MY sensibilities. I will do what I see fit in my own home and in public as long as it does not affect other people's sensibilities. But if it affects other people I will limit it to my own home or otherwise away from those offended. I sure as hell don't want anybody to tell me that what I'm doing is somehow wrong if it does not affect them.

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

Ugh, perhaps we should start a new thread and take it there.....

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

Yeah, sorry 'bout that. It's so easy to get sidetracked sometimes

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

We had a topic???
Oh, yeah. Sorry.

 

Re: Finger-printing at Traffic Stops

No issues here, if I could have I would have myself.

 

In the paragraph above you propose that it is best NOT to challenge the traditional authority of a nation (read the government). Then you say the easiest way to control them is to divide them. How can you be in conflict with someone that is not challenging you ? In the same paragrpah you say conform or you are bad then you say if you don't conform you are easier to defeat ? EH ?

It sounds like you are saying someone is evil and an underminer unless they are fighting YOUR fight. Just what makes YOUR issues any better or worse than someone else's ?

 

Hartage-

I think you missed my point. I wasn't arguing that YOU don't believe what you believe. I was arguing that the modern liberals with whom you align yourself, don't believe in those things.

I've certainly known plenty of these hippies you describe. Probably some of the same ones. I'd tend to agree that their attitude is strongly "live and let live." The major exception is on environmental issues. Environmentalism has been the single biggest factor in eroding private property rights. (drugs being a close second) It's also currently the most promising (from their point of view) means for the united nations to achieve world governance. They're already painfully close to a world "carbon" tax. All in the name of widely disputed theories, which are promoted with the vigor of a religion. And hippies are leading the charge.

As to public speech, the problem arises with the first questions that must be asked. What CAN be said? Where? When? By whom? If a line is to be drawn, it must be drawn somewhere. Perhaps more importantly, it must be drawn by someone. Whoever draws that line has immense control over what can and can't be discussed publicly. Who can be trusted with such power? I see the only viable alternative as being to simply not draw a line. Speech, in and of itself, is not capable of injuring another person. If that speech leads to actions that do injure someone, it's those actions that need to be addressed, not the speech.

His issue is freedom. I contend that his issue is better than any other, because no other can exist without it.

I beg to differ. Have you ever seen someone's insides? We're ALL ugly on the inside.

 

This is perhaps where we differ, property rights. There are things we know now that we did not know in the past. But too late, we have already destroyed 99% of old growth forests in our country. Now we are desperately trying to get third world countries to stop destroying theirs for the same reason we destroyed ours.... progress.

When science brought us cars, planes, roads, the guns you and I shoot, and more food we lauded science as a God send. When science tells us global warming is man made now science is all of the sudden wrong ?

The hippies in more ways than one are forward thinkers. Being radicals they don't subscribe to mainstream and are willing to sacrifice for what they believe in. They fight to protect the streams, forests and bays you and I will have to subsist from if SHTF.

The hippies that live on the ranch get 90% of their food from their gardens and the forest around them. If SHTF happens do you know how much their lifestyle would change ? Very, very little. They will still have power when the rest of us don't. They will still have water like they always have. The hippies in the "real world" will be affected less than most other communities.

I don't agree with a lot of things hippies do or stand for. But I do understand them enough to respect their reasonings. I also try to understand their viewpoints even if it does affect my own situation.

Had we listened to hippies more in the past we would have more things to live off if SHTF.

When you are with your children out in a park and someone is on a soapbox shouting the virtues of stanic worship it will bite you in the butt. Even worse some pedophile on a soapbox promoting his beliefs. Even worse some pedophile taking pictures of your children in the park. Pictures in public places that are not commercialy distributed are protected much like free speech.

Who is to say what is repulsive to who ? You and I eat beef but to a hindu seeing a slaughtered cow is seeing a slaughtered person. Unless you are willing to have your family exposed to every societal ill out there and have that exposure protected a line needs to be drawn somewhere. I'm sure there are many things you would much rather not have your family exposed to as they are at the park or at school or at any public place.

Yeah, I've been exposed to a quite torn apart body at a young age. Makes you think about your own mortality. Seeing someone dead in front of you is quite different than seeing someone's insides. I could never be a medical examiner.

 

Ok, so I'm gonna derail the conversation even more, but the thread only exists because it was derailed in the first place.

While on a security job at a hospital, escorting a "corpse crew" to the morgue, we walked in on an infant autopsy. The top half of the baby was on the table in this grotesque horror movie pose and the docs had the bottom half, poking around in it. It was about the most disturbing thing I've ever seen.

 

Yes I misunderstood "traditional authority" but my main idea still stands. Your post gives the idea to stand united and together. That if there are side issues it will only divide and therefore make "us" easier to defeat. Just exactly what are "side issues" and therefore only devisive ? What makes one person's order of importance right and another's wrong ?