NavigationBanners
McCain-Feingold
Active forum topicsRecent blog postsUser loginWho's new
Who's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 1164 guests online.
|
Add new commentElianSubmitted by Bill St. Clair on Fri, 2003-01-31 03:25.
by Bill St. Clair
I've held off commenting about Elian Gonzalez, and I've attempted to resist pointing to stories on the web. Today at the health club, while walking on the treadmill, I saw Diane Sawyer's morning show on the television. Something about what I saw makes it imperitive for me to speak. The powers that be have decided that Elian will go back to Cuba with his father. My initial take on the issue was that this was proper. The man is his father. The intervening space of time has caused me to reconsider. The proper way for this to have gone would have been for Elian's father to come to the United States, talk with Elian and his Miami family, with whom he is currently living, and come to a mutual agreement between all involved parties, Elian included, as to where Elian would live for the next little while. Noone in Washington, no government agency, no court of law, no news talking head, nor I would have anything to do with this decision. If they were unable to come to an agreement, at that point they might petition courts and governments to help them out. Not before. Instead, it has become a political issue. The INS, the Florida courts, Washington politicians, news talking heads, and I have told them what to do, mostly without ever talking to the only people directly involved: Elian, his Miami family, and his father. Most of us are happy to express our opinions and let it rest at that. It is after all not really our business. The government folks, however, declared that there would be a meeting in Washington where Elian would be handed over to his father, like it or not. They got the privacy of the meeting right, but they decided the outcome in advance, and, as with all government action, there is the threat of force behind non-compliance. Compliant Elian's Miami family has not been. Good for them. From my perspective, they're the only people in this whole thing who are considering Elian's wishes, Elian's health and happiness. Forceful I pray the government will not be, though their history is piss poor in that department. Somehow we've allowed our law enforcement "authorities" to believe it's OK to kill people over actions that endangered noone's life until those authorities became involved. This must stop. If a federal cop spills a single drop of anyone's blood over this, I will pray to God for his immortal soul, though it will be hard for me to convince myself that he still has one. He'll need that prayer very soon, too, because I will also wish for his speedy execution, and it will not surprise me if someone in Miami hears my wish and makes it so. in sha' allah add new comment | quote | 1027 reads
Reply |
BlogrollFirearm NewsQuotesEvery man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission. -- L. Neil Smith Reread that pesky first clause of the Second Amendment. It doesn't say what any of us thought it said. What it says is that infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is treason. What else do you call an act that endangers "the security of a free state"? And if it's treason, then it's punishable by death. I suggest due process, speedy trials, and public hangings. -- L. Neil Smith Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents. -- John Lott, commenting on the National Academy of Sciences report (PDF) on gun control laws Zero Aggression Principle ("Zap") "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim." -- L. Neil Smith Formerly called the "Non-Aggression Principle", or "NAP" Why Did It Have to be... Guns? Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put. If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you. If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims. What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him? -- L. Neil Smith The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war. -- Bill St. Clair Monthly ArchivesTTLB |
Recent comments
4 hours 58 min ago
2 days 3 hours ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 2 days ago
1 week 2 days ago
1 week 6 days ago
2 weeks 3 days ago
2 weeks 3 days ago
2 weeks 5 days ago
2 weeks 5 days ago