"Dee Flint" wrote in message

NO! The sky is NOT falling!

No Dee, "the people" are the gov't. Let me give you an example.

No one in his or her right mind would ever trust any president,
representive, or group of them to decide whether an individual dies or not
(or any other group of bueraucrats either!) We would only allow citizens to
do that. It is called a jury and there are 12 of them to make sure they get
it right (yes, I know, there are still far too many mistakes and DNA
evidence has released a sizeable number from death row--perhaps with DNA
evidence we can increase our accuracy a bit.)

Well, the FCC is just like that. And we should never trust them to make a
really important decision for us. The FCC can only do its' job correctly if
all 350 million of us are looking over their shoulders and telling them what
to do. Trouble is, my president, senators and reps look a bit raggy around
the edges, even to the point of making me think they are corrupt criminals.
I am trusting they will get around to fix that soon ... straight face

If someone is a lazy ass laying around trusting their gov't to do it for
them or for the other citizens, he or she is far from a great Amerian. A
great American is always active in making sure the peoples voice is heard.

What makes America great is everyones' right to free speech, activism,
protests, etc. It will all shake out in the end, any one mans/womans
opinion, or even any one group of men and women is unimportant in the much
larger picture.

In the final say, only the people have a right to place limits and they only
need to place limits to keep one from infringing on another, but you already
know that, our founding fathers documents could serve as no better example,
they need no "interpretation" on what anyone person thinks they either are
or are not--that is difficult enough.

Regards,
JS

"Slow Code" wrote in message

In my personal opinion, perverts, baby killers, wife killers, husband
murders, serial killers, etc. need to be watched the rest of their lives.
If I were king you would NOT want to break the law (well, if you were a
family member or one of my buddies you could, well, unless I really needed
some money, then you would have to pay me for my "help.") grin

However, I will accept what the majority of the people want, I am just
afraid we are NOT getting that. But then, when I consider the last
presidents since kennedy a bunch of corrupt criminals, how do I really
expect much at all?

Regards,
JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
"Dee Flint" wrote in message

NO! The sky is NOT falling!


You are getting very confused. I'm not the one that is panicking over
changes. I've already said several times that I'm am not worried about the
changes.

No Dee, "the people" are the gov't. Let me give you an example.


I've not said anything to the contrary. I've repeatedly said that society
(i.e. the people) find it necessary to have rules to insure the health of
the society.

No one in his or her right mind would ever trust any president,
representive, or group of them to decide whether an individual dies or not
(or any other group of bueraucrats either!) We would only allow citizens
to do that. It is called a jury and there are 12 of them to make sure
they get it right (yes, I know, there are still far too many mistakes and
DNA evidence has released a sizeable number from death row--perhaps with
DNA evidence we can increase our accuracy a bit.)

Well, the FCC is just like that. And we should never trust them to make a
really important decision for us. The FCC can only do its' job correctly
if all 350 million of us are looking over their shoulders and telling them
what to do. Trouble is, my president, senators and reps look a bit raggy
around the edges, even to the point of making me think they are corrupt
criminals. I am trusting they will get around to fix that soon ...
straight face

If someone is a lazy ass laying around trusting their gov't to do it for
them or for the other citizens, he or she is far from a great Amerian. A
great American is always active in making sure the peoples voice is heard.


I've never advocated that. Each person has a right to be heard. But you
forget that each person has their own opinion. Should your opinion have any
more weight than mine or vice versa?

What makes America great is everyones' right to free speech, activism,
protests, etc. It will all shake out in the end, any one mans/womans
opinion, or even any one group of men and women is unimportant in the much
larger picture.

In the final say, only the people have a right to place limits and they
only need to place limits to keep one from infringing on another, but you
already know that, our founding fathers documents could serve as no better
example, they need no "interpretation" on what anyone person thinks they
either are or are not--that is difficult enough.

Regards,
JS


It's already been pointed out to you that our founding fathers included the
Supreme Court for the very purpose of "interpreting" the Constitution.

Dee, N8UZE

"Dee Flint" wrote in message

Dee:

When I said, "NO! The sky is NOT falling!" I meant we have firmly decided
that! I caught that you were stepping away from other amateurs decrying the
death of ham radio due to changes ... it was satire and I see how it could
be taken much differently ...

I read over you text much too quickly and was quick to take a much different
spin on it that the one I see now.

Yes. The supreme courts whole reason for existence is to enforce the
constitution to the letter, you are, again, correct, strange no one is seems
more upset by the gross inability of it to have done so in recent decades
....

The crux is this, I see citizens playing much more into their self gov't.
Let me give you an example of just how much so:
ALL police officers and sheriffs should be drafted, and go through a "boot
camp." At the end of 12 weeks of boot, we press them into service for a
four year term. The pay scale is fair and adjusted for special cases. But,
we all accept this as our duty. With this one change we could just about
completely remove corruption and restore respect to law enforcement. Plus,
the added benefit would probably be an overall reduced cost to the tax
payer.

But, this is only one change in a sea of changes I would make. Many I see
are disenfranchised by gov't playing a mother/father role for them, this was
never meant to be. I don't need a president, senator or rep "with a plan",
I simply need them to be honest and upfront with the people, then represent
the peoples wishes--this seems almost opposite from what I am experiencing.
If I can trust 12 men with my life on a jury, then I can darn well trust 350
million governing ourselves beside me ...

Regards,
JS

Please folks, do not reply to these off topic posts.

If these idiots never get any replies, they will eventually give up
and go away.

Thanks,

Bill, W6WRT

"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
Please folks, do not reply to these off topic posts.

If these idiots never get any replies, they will eventually give up
and go away.

Thanks,

Bill, W6WRT

Shut up Bill you ****ing asshole.

Dee Flint wrote:
"John Smith" wrote in message
...

Preposterous, that is like arguing liberty = murder. We all have absolute
liberty, granted by our creator, we govern ourselfs in its use. The people
have that right, the government does not, unless it serves as only a tool
of the people in doing so. There is much confusion here, laws do NOT give
us rights and/or liberty, they only serve to remove or control those.
Before we apply law, we are only governed by our creator, and he has given
us all free will.


No I'm saying that all our rights do have limits and that it is for a very
good reason. If our rights were absolute, they would have no limits and we
could indeed kill each other to attempt to insure those rights. Society has
decided (and rightly so) that doesn't work too well for the survival of
society. The moment society decides that some rules are required to make
that society work, then our rights are limited.

in many cases we CAN indeed kill those that inpinge on our rights

Here in Michigan I can as can you Kill to defend yourself or your
property the laws inhibiting were pared back effective around the first
of OCT of this year

in other case we may indeed argue some form of justifaction for even
the act of homocide in defense of our right

Those documents are "just paper" free to be changes by presidential will!

Dee Flint wrote:

"John Smith" wrote in message
...


"Slow Code" wrote in message


...


The way I understand our constitution, a man creates a debt to society
with
crime, once he pays this debt he is to have his rights restored; this
keeps
society from creating dangerous and dark forces through abuses of its'
citizens. While I do believe special arguments can be made of the type of
crime a criminal commits, child molestation, premeditated murder, rape,
etc., in most instances the above should be followed. I think one clue is
the statement in our constitution, paraphrased here, " ... endowed with
unalienable rights by
his creator ..." This is best seen when one applies thought and sees that
any tampering with such rights immediately infringes upons ones rights to
the "pursuit of happiness", freedom and access to those resources granted
us by our creator.




That is in the Declaration of Independence not the Constitution.

Dee, N8UZE





--
Joe Leikhim K4SAT
"The RFI-EMI-GUY"©

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

"Follow The Money" ;-P

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
"Dee Flint" wrote in message

NO! The sky is NOT falling!


You are getting very confused. I'm not the one that is panicking over
changes. I've already said several times that I'm am not worried about
the changes.

No Dee, "the people" are the gov't. Let me give you an example.


I've not said anything to the contrary. I've repeatedly said that society
(i.e. the people) find it necessary to have rules to insure the health of
the society.

Snipped

Hi All,
If you read the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments to the U.S.
Constitution) there are 2 distinct groups ie "The People" and "Congress" . I
paraphrase - Congess shall make no law regarding the peoples right to
..................... etc. etc.
Ace - WH2T

"an_odd_freak" wrote in
oups.com:



in many cases we CAN indeed kill those that inpinge on our rights

Here in Michigan I can as can you Kill to defend yourself or your
property


No Markie, You don't have to worry about anyone trying to take your
property unless they want a garbage dump.

Learn CW!

SC