NavigationBanners
Active forum topicsRecent blog postsUser loginWho's new
Who's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 1300 guests online.
|
A Ring of TruthSubmitted by Bill St. Clair on Sun, 2008-03-30 18:53.
L. Neil Smith at The Libertarian Enterprise - how to prevent future terrorism by the Taking Scissors Away goons. [tle] Understand from the very beginning that, even if TSA were sincere about protecting airline passengers from terrorist nipple rings and similar dire threats, they would still be an abject failure. The simple, inescapable fact is that self-defense is an individual bodily function -- like eating, sleeping, making love, or going to the bathroom -- that cannot be delegated to anybody else. Every attempt to evade or override that fact invariably winds up in tragedy. Sometimes the tragedy is of monstrous proportions, as it was on September 11, 2001.
That's a very important concept, so I'm going to state it again: self-defense is an individual bodily function that cannot be delegated. The very notion is absurd. Every attempt to do so ends in tragedy. "What's the alternative?", I pretend to hear you ask. Well to begin with, for the sake of preventing any further violations of the rights and dignity of individuals -- and to avoid any more tragedies like 9/11 -- the TSA must be abolished, and for some reasonable interval, its budget diverted to compensate its many thousands of victims. Before they are entirely released from service, each TSA employee must be individually investigated, scrutinized, charged, and tried for his or her crimes against the Constitution for which the excuse -- exactly as it was established at the Nuremberg Tribunals following World War II -- that "I was just following orders" will not be acceptable. Under the terms clearly mandated by the Fourteenth Amendment, no former TSA employee will ever be employable at any level of government again (no government pensions should be payable to any of these people), nor will he or she be permitted to run for or to hold public office. Moreover, because many of their crimes closely resemble (or actually are) sexual offenses, the residences of former TSA employees, in any neighborhood, will be a matter of public record, and whenever they move, their new addresses will be duly reported to their new neighbors. Furthermore, anyone who ever referred to the infamous "No-Fly List" to deprive Americans of their right to travel, or who helped to compile that list, will be subject to exactly the same sanctions as former TSA employees. Substantial rewards will be offered to those willing to turn fellow government or corporate employees over to the law. The ownership or use of weapons-detecting technology by any agency or employee or government at any level, or by any corporation, or by its corporate personnel, will be treated as an equivalent to felonious assault. Aside from the presence of unobtrusive, totally transparent "bomb-sniffing" devices, no searches of passengers or their belongings (including the use of X-rays, multispectral cameras, or any similar mechanism) will be permitted at America's airports by anyone, ever again. add new comment | quote | 407 reads
( categories: RKBA )
|
BlogrollLewRockwell.comQuotesEvery 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 "Tell me," I was once asked, "What do you think about gun control? Give me the short answer." To which I replied, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you." -- Mike Vanderboegh 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 TTLB |
Recent comments
6 days 14 hours ago
1 week 2 days ago
2 weeks 15 min ago
2 weeks 19 hours ago
2 weeks 1 day ago
2 weeks 1 day ago
2 weeks 2 days ago
2 weeks 3 days ago
2 weeks 4 days ago
2 weeks 4 days ago