TexasCHLforum.com

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Rex B wrote:How the heck did we get to this point, where Federal officers can ruin the lives of law-abiding citizens just to enhance their arrest record.
How do we address an abuse like is being done to this family?

We [the collective "we"] got to this point by not paying attention, and being willing to sacrifice tiny increments of personal freedom in order to obtain tiny increments of societal and political security and stability. Over the past 147 years, the changes have aggregated to resemble nothing that anybody from the 19th century back would recognize as consistent with constitutional government.

The reason I use the figure "147 years" is that the Civil War (or whatever you want to call it) ended 147 years ago in 1865. That war, for better or for worse, radically changed the balance of power between the federal government and the several states. An overbearing and strong central government is the only thing any of us alive today has ever known, so we have nothing really experientially for living any other way. So The People accept it as normal and business as usual, and they have no experience of or knowledge about (other than book learnin') a time when individual state sovereignty was a true legal roadblock to federal ambitions.

It's only going to get worse, not better. Not even a (precious to some) Ron Paul would have the stones or the clout to dismantle all of those bureaucracies. Homeland Security is here to stay. No president elected from here forward will have what it takes to dismantle it. And democrats, believing that government is the primary job engine, will block any attempt to dismantle any such bureaucracy based on their belief that those government jobs (and the union controls they represent) are desirable—no matter what price in personal freedom is paid by the electorate.

For their own part, the electorate is too cowardly to do "whatever it takes" (and you can be free to define that for yourself) to roll it all back.

That's how we got to this point.

VMI77 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Rex B wrote:How the heck did we get to this point, where Federal officers can ruin the lives of law-abiding citizens just to enhance their arrest record.
How do we address an abuse like is being done to this family?

We [the collective "we"] got to this point by not paying attention, and being willing to sacrifice tiny increments of personal freedom in order to obtain tiny increments of societal and political security and stability. Over the past 147 years, the changes have aggregated to resemble nothing that anybody from the 19th century back would recognize as consistent with constitutional government.

The reason I use the figure "147 years" is that the Civil War (or whatever you want to call it) ended 147 years ago in 1865. That war, for better or for worse, radically changed the balance of power between the federal government and the several states. An overbearing and strong central government is the only thing any of us alive today has ever known, so we have nothing really experientially for living any other way. So The People accept it as normal and business as usual, and they have no experience of or knowledge about (other than book learnin') a time when individual state sovereignty was a true legal roadblock to federal ambitions.

It's only going to get worse, not better. Not even a (precious to some) Ron Paul would have the stones or the clout to dismantle all of those bureaucracies. Homeland Security is here to stay. No president elected from here forward will have what it takes to dismantle it. And democrats, believing that government is the primary job engine, will block any attempt to dismantle any such bureaucracy based on their belief that those government jobs (and the union controls they represent) are desirable—no matter what price in personal freedom is paid by the electorate.

For their own part, the electorate is too cowardly to do "whatever it takes" (and you can be free to define that for yourself) to roll it all back.

That's how we got to this point.

I agree that the political system won't get rid of it; however, the political system is committing suicide because there is also no will to fix the debt problem, and the debt problem unfixed means inevitable economic collapse. Economic collapse may or may not fix the problem.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Rex B wrote:How the heck did we get to this point, where Federal officers can ruin the lives of law-abiding citizens just to enhance their arrest record.
How do we address an abuse like is being done to this family?

We [the collective "we"] got to this point by not paying attention, and being willing to sacrifice tiny increments of personal freedom in order to obtain tiny increments of societal and political security and stability. Over the past 147 years, the changes have aggregated to resemble nothing that anybody from the 19th century back would recognize as consistent with constitutional government.

The reason I use the figure "147 years" is that the Civil War (or whatever you want to call it) ended 147 years ago in 1865. That war, for better or for worse, radically changed the balance of power between the federal government and the several states. An overbearing and strong central government is the only thing any of us alive today has ever known, so we have nothing really experientially for living any other way. So The People accept it as normal and business as usual, and they have no experience of or knowledge about (other than book learnin') a time when individual state sovereignty was a true legal roadblock to federal ambitions.

It's only going to get worse, not better. Not even a (precious to some) Ron Paul would have the stones or the clout to dismantle all of those bureaucracies. Homeland Security is here to stay. No president elected from here forward will have what it takes to dismantle it. And democrats, believing that government is the primary job engine, will block any attempt to dismantle any such bureaucracy based on their belief that those government jobs (and the union controls they represent) are desirable—no matter what price in personal freedom is paid by the electorate.

For their own part, the electorate is too cowardly to do "whatever it takes" (and you can be free to define that for yourself) to roll it all back.


That's how we got to this point.

I agree that the political system won't get rid of it; however, the political system is committing suicide because there is also no will to fix the debt problem, and the debt problem unfixed means inevitable economic collapse. Economic collapse may or may not fix the problem.

I agree, and I think it is going to take something that drastic.....something so toxic to country that federal paralysis ensues. At that point, people will have no choice but to pick up the pieces and start over. But, let me be clear that this is not what I desire. What I desire is for our current officials to suddenly have a change of heart, confess their sins, and dedicate themselves to acting constitutionally. Ain't gonna happen though.

Rex B wrote:I think government collapse would mean more official oppression, not less.
All those government enforcement people aren't just going to go home and do nothing

Dave2 wrote:

Rex B wrote:I think government collapse would mean more official oppression, not less.
All those government enforcement people aren't just going to go home and do nothing

All won't, but many will when the paychecks stop.

sjfcontrol wrote:

Dave2 wrote:

Rex B wrote:I think government collapse would mean more official oppression, not less.
All those government enforcement people aren't just going to go home and do nothing

All won't, but many will when the paychecks stop.

Government zombies?

VMI77 wrote:Sounds like a typical Fed "sting" to me. This has been going on for a long time....remember the FBI and the "Olympic bomber" years ago? They tricked the guy into signing a "confession" by telling him it would help their investigation. Didn't matter to them at all that the guy was innocent or that they knew the confession claim was a lie. Nearly ALL of the supposed "terrorist" stings follow the same MO --lies and trickery to create the impression of a crime that only exists because it was orchestrated by the Feds. A lot of these prosecutions are so ridiculous that they fail in court and the jury acquits, but the Feds don't seem to care. They get the publicity for the fake arrests, and the trial, months or years later, is like an afterthought. I don't think we've all that long before DHS becomes synonymous with KGB.

Jumping Frog wrote:

VMI77 wrote:Sounds like a typical Fed "sting" to me. This has been going on for a long time....remember the FBI and the "Olympic bomber" years ago? They tricked the guy into signing a "confession" by telling him it would help their investigation. Didn't matter to them at all that the guy was innocent or that they knew the confession claim was a lie. Nearly ALL of the supposed "terrorist" stings follow the same MO --lies and trickery to create the impression of a crime that only exists because it was orchestrated by the Feds. A lot of these prosecutions are so ridiculous that they fail in court and the jury acquits, but the Feds don't seem to care. They get the publicity for the fake arrests, and the trial, months or years later, is like an afterthought. I don't think we've all that long before DHS becomes synonymous with KGB.

That is exactly what happened with the so-called Hutaree Militia guys. Arrested with big fanfare and headlines as "domestic terrorists". Nothing stuck - zero convictions.

Dave2 wrote:

Rex B wrote:I think government collapse would mean more official oppression, not less.
All those government enforcement people aren't just going to go home and do nothing

All won't, but many will when the paychecks stop.

1. The federal government becomes increasingly intrusive and overarching. The presidency becomes increasingly autocratic, ignoring and bypassing Congress. Congress becomes increasingly unresponsive to their constitutional role. Personal freedom declines. The public debt goes up. Taxes go up. Services paid for by those taxes decline. Things just never get better, and the people do not revolt. The United States of America ceases to exist as the "shining city on a hill," and the American Dream dies.
2. The federal government becomes increasingly intrusive and overarching. The presidency becomes increasingly autocratic, ignoring and bypassing Congress. Congress becomes increasingly unresponsive to their constitutional role. Personal freedom declines. The public debt goes up. Taxes go up. Services paid for by those taxes decline. Things just never get better, and the people finally do revolt. Crime escalates as the law enforcement and judicial systems collapse, until people begin to take matters into their own hands. Vigilante justice reigns for a while until people begin to organize a new law enforcement and judicial system, and public executions return. Radical environmentalists and others who have preyed upon and bullied society become suddenly scarce. Cities empty as the delivery of food dries up. Things will be extremely ugly at this point. There will be mass die-offs, and hundreds of thousands of deaths on both sides as city dwellers descend like locusts and attempt to take food from rural dwellers. Martial law will be declared in many areas, but the ability to enforce it will collapse quickly as troops realize that the only choices they have are to either fire on their fellow citizens or desert their posts to go take care of their families and local communities. BTW, I don't regard this as desertion, any rational person's primary duty being to the ones he loves. Duty to country means nothing when you have no country worth defending anymore. As the remaining survivors begin to reorganize themselves, they will be facing possible foreign military interventions, and the US/Mexico border will cease to exist for a time. But in the end, people will reorganize themselves and there will be a national rebirth. It will be a very much different nation than the one we know today, but it will be one in which the rights of man and the sovereignty of the individual are nationally recognized again.

sjfcontrol wrote:Jericho ish?

psijac wrote:I think the root of the problem is DAs that will do anything to win a case, so they can build a strong record when they eventually run for public office. No matter how ruinous it is to the innocent. Japan has it much worse. We need to find a way to Hold Defense Attorneys accountable on a per case basis