lawsuit: ID checks unconstitutional

[Timebuilder]

I fear those who are moved to extremist rhetoric as an argument against protecting the innocent.

If we are so sensitive that we cannot control our borders, stem the flow of deadly drugs into our nation's young people, and root out terrorism, then we truly deserve what we get.

Anarchy.

 

[A Squared]

Timebuilder,

I knew I should have skipped the cocaine reference. Now that it’s out there, I should explain what I meant.

I don’t object to attempts to control drug trafficking, within the guidelines of our constitution. I am very against suspending the provisions of that constitution for the "War on Drugs"

Just within the last few years, Anti-drug bills before Congress included:

A bill which would allow narcotics agents to shoot down suspected drug trafficking aircraft.

A bill which would allow government officials to confiscate any quantity of cash over $10,000.00, without any proof whatsoever of criminal activity.

Thankfully, both bills were voted down, but these are the sort of things which are being proposed to "protect the innocents"; Execution without benefit of a trial, and confiscation of property without due process of the law. Have you read the Fifth Amendment of our constitution? The part that says " No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" ?
And speaking of protecting innocents, who was protecting the innocents aboard the floatplane shot down in Peru, with the active participation of the US government? If I recall correctly it was the wife of a missionary and her infant daughter that were shot.
Yes, I find it disturbing that some of our lawmakers want to do exactly the same thing in US airspace. I would much rather allow "the flow of deadly drugs into our nation's young people" than be subject to execution without a trial. remember, the cocaine doesn't just jump up the nostrils of "innocents" those "innocents" put it there themselves

regards

 

[dogg]

Hey timebuilder,
The innocent are not innocent- the way to keep coke out of your kids nose is to teach them not to put it there in the first place. Give them a reason not to do it like being involved with them. I can assure you that you don't start a war on drugs or a war on terrorism or a war on drunk drivers or a war on child molesters. The war on drugs has only raised the price and made it more profitable to bring drugs in. And all of the mini "war departments" just buy more black cordura and kevlar and guns and all kinds of cool stuff because that is how you get paid more in the government. Make a bigger department even if it does not really do anything. Just as we are seeing with the TSA. And to pay for it all lets have more search and seizure.

And no one is nescessarily supporting the guys lawsuit per se, I think it is more the idea of standing up to the government and putting them on notice that wholesale dumping of basic rights won't stand. It is very important in America that we do this on a regular basis to stop those among us who long for a socialist state. It is easy to lose lots of personal freedom during times of drum beating and national patriotic hysteria.

Safety and security for all who need it can be found in many socialist states around the world.......

 

[TWA Dude]

The Meriam-Webster definition of freedom: the quality or state of being free: as a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another.

According to definition b: we are a free country but according to a: we are not. In order to do many things we need to pay the goverment fees and take tests. Are we a free country even if we must present an ID to exercise certain priveledges? That's for the Courts to decide and they've already said that it's okay.

Everyone has their own concept of what words like "freedom", "democracy" and even "safety" mean to them, but just because one views things as absolutes doesn't make it so. Our "freedoms" may be "eroded" in many different ways yet if We, the People, agree that it's necessary for the Greater Good -- then it is.

 

[troy]

Here is what I recieved back from John, any comments?





> Are you the same John that is suing the airlines
> because you can't fly?

Yes, I'm the one.

> I don't believe what I am
> hearing. First it's the people that want to kill us,

That was nine months ago. You can come out from under your bed now.
Nobody has been killed since then -- except by the US government,
which killed more civilians in Afghanistan than their 'terrorists'
killed in NYC and DC. And which still has hundreds of people locked
up in prisons, without trials, unable to see lawyers, or let the public
know they are imprisoned.

When will you stop seeing terrorists lurking behind every door?
Watching less TV and reading fewer newspapers will probably help; they
make more money by scaring the public.

> next the "Americans" that are God-less and cry because
> the Pledge has the word "God" in it,

As an atheist myself, I do object to the Christian/Jewish "God" being
plastered all over our government. The Ninth Circuit was right.
Religion is a fine things for churches, but not for governments.
Having government schools making my kids repeat a mantra about
a god I don't believe in is a bad idea.

> now you! Why don't you get on our side?

I am on our side. What side are you on?

> Stop being a complete
> idiot Libertarian and look at cold, hard facts. Why
> don't you just TRY to explain your stupid idea to ANY
> person that was at the 09/11 events. You are just out
> of your league.

Lots more than 3300 people died in World War II defending freedom. Do
you want us to throw that freedom down the toilet "to make us safe"?
Because of 3300 deaths in a couple of buildings? I don't know what
your league is, you may be in it or out of it, but if you think we
should give up basic Constitutional principles out of fear of planes
flying into buildings, then we will simply disagree.

John Gilmore

 

[Andy Neill]

Troy said:

Here is what I recieved back from John, any comments?

Do you mean comments not related to the lack of etiqutte displayed by publishing a private email?

 

[troy]

lack of etiqutte? It's my e-mail, I recieved it, and I can display whatever I feel neccessary just as long as it doesn't offend anybody by using vulgar language or biggotry (sp?)

I just thought that we could discuss what he had replied to, on MY PRIVATE e-mail. Yes, the one I decided to share.

 

[Timebuilder]

I'm thankful that the dictionary is not the source of what freedom means in America.

We have to fight many wars in order to retain our freedom, whether it be a war on terrorism, a war on drugs, or a war on illiteracy. As in all war, mistakes are made. Folks in my church know the missions pilot who was shot down as a suspected drug transport plane. Although a tragedy, it does not mean that we should just roll over and allow the tide of drugs to enter the country unfettered. This decidedly Libertarian viewpoint would allow each individual American to make his own decision on whether or not to purchase the drugs available in his own town. This is not freedom, it is stupidity. Only a little imagination is necessary to estimate the negative impact on our society.

Each one of us is, in reality, a soldier in this cultural and social war. At stake is not only our airline security, but the very structure and fabric of our society. Anarchy and socialism are the norm in this modern world, and many would infect our country with the drive toward hedonism and worship of the self.

Our goal should be do what we need to do to keep our country from becoming a European style toilet, where Homas and IRA bombs kill civilians with regularity and by intention, not by accident.

This means we must identfy and track the "bad actors", and stop them before they kill more of us. Will we have the guts to endure some distastefulness in order to retain the society we cherish? Or, will we reject all means to accomplish our goals because they make us too uncomfortable?

How much do we value what we have, and what are we willing to do to keep it?

That's the issue. It isn't the question of showing ID to get on a plane.

 

[flynhigh31]

This decidedly Libertarian viewpoint would allow each individual American to make his own decision on whether or not to purchase the drugs available in his own town. This is not freedom, it is stupidity.

LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. TO BE FREE TO DO WHATEVER WE WANT WITHOUT HARMING OUR NEIGHBOR. IF YOU BREAK A LAW,(THAT WASN'T CREATED BY SOME WHINING IDIOT WHO DECIDES THAT IT'S BETTER FOR EVERYONE.) YOU GO TO JAIL. I'D RATHER GIVE AMERICANS THE CHOICE, IF THEY SO WISH, TO BUY A DRUG IN THEIR HOME TOWN, THAN TO TAKE AWAY THEIR ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO CHOSE FOR THEMSELVES.

TIMEBUILDER.....STOP BEING SUCH A COMMUNIST AND JOIN THE GROUP.

 

[Timebuilder]

Rather than explain why this is an indefensible position, I'm going to give your post the response it deserves.