Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - All your State Defenses are belong to Dear Leader.

Yakk · 11-03-2006, 01:17 PM

The constitution and the laws are only words on paper.

They are only a line in the sand.

But you need lines in the sand. While lines in the sand get in the way when you are trying to do something, if you remove them all, there won't be any lines to protect you when the devil turns around.

...

Let's suppose we erase all of the laws that constrain the government. Not just some of them, all of them -- we remove any and all laws that restrict what the government can do.

Under Ustwo's belief system, this isn't a problem. Because if the government isn't out to get you, it won't do anything bad. And if the government is out to get you, it can ignore the laws that exist.

Anyone see a problem with this argument?

The lines in the sand -- the laws that restrict what the government can and cannot do -- they tell us when the government is doing something bad. Before you can send troops in to burn Chicago, you need to convince the troops that burning Chicago is something you can tell them to do. Restrictions, like "you can't use the military as police", "the national guard of each state belongs to the state in question" -- they are lines in the sand that keep corruption away from power.

This law states the federal government is right to use military force to engage in police action. That the states have no control over their national guards, they are tools of the federal government.

These are checks and balances. Before this law existed, if the federal government asked for national guard troops, the govornor and the troops could say "no", and feel they where in the right. Now, if the feds ask for troops, and the govornor says "no", the troops will feel that the federal government is in the right.

Of course, if it is your policy that "I will do whatever the government says I should do", you probably won't be bothered by this.

11-03-2006, 01:17 PM	#15 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	The constitution and the laws are only words on paper. They are only a line in the sand. But you need lines in the sand. While lines in the sand get in the way when you are trying to do something, if you remove them all, there won't be any lines to protect you when the devil turns around. ... Let's suppose we erase all of the laws that constrain the government. Not just some of them, all of them -- we remove any and all laws that restrict what the government can do. Under Ustwo's belief system, this isn't a problem. Because if the government isn't out to get you, it won't do anything bad. And if the government is out to get you, it can ignore the laws that exist. Anyone see a problem with this argument? The lines in the sand -- the laws that restrict what the government can and cannot do -- they tell us when the government is doing something bad. Before you can send troops in to burn Chicago, you need to convince the troops that burning Chicago is something you can tell them to do. Restrictions, like "you can't use the military as police", "the national guard of each state belongs to the state in question" -- they are lines in the sand that keep corruption away from power. This law states the federal government is right to use military force to engage in police action. That the states have no control over their national guards, they are tools of the federal government. These are checks and balances. Before this law existed, if the federal government asked for national guard troops, the govornor and the troops could say "no", and feel they where in the right. Now, if the feds ask for troops, and the govornor says "no", the troops will feel that the federal government is in the right. Of course, if it is your policy that "I will do whatever the government says I should do", you probably won't be bothered by this. __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.