Matthew Maynard dot net Not the MSM you're used to |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Me e-mail
GreyMatter Archives Blogroll < # Homepage ? > |
April 27th, 2005 Democrats & Property - It occurs to me, given recent events with Social Security and infected ash trees, that there is a dire lack of respect for property in these United States. Its not an unexpected thing, given the history of the word property. We once attributed it to people, then went through a nasty and unfortunately necessary bloodbath to solve that problem. Then came the Communists, who established a foothold in the dialogue and the tax code, then in the social programs, all the while proclaiming support for the common good. Its not really a surprise that the word property is ignored, nor is it surprising that the average person on the street can't remember (or often, was never taught) what the 4th and 5th amendments to the Constitution say and what impact those amendments have on their personal property. Property, be it in the form of money or goods, is the physical manifestation of labor, whether physical or mental. To deny a person their property is to cause their labor to be fruitless (either in whole or in part), and as such, imposes a degree of slavery on the person whose property is denied. That being said, some property denial is warranted, such as confiscation of evidence of a crime. However, this should only be done by warrant and judicial process, with probable cause. In all other cases, if property must be confiscated, compensation should be given, at a fair market price. In the case of Mr. Horvath's trees, he should be paid for their destruction, as they clearly threaten not only his other trees but those of his neighbors. He should be willing to accept such compensation, either monetary or in the form of replacement trees. But none is apparently forthcoming. I see no reason why he should yield, except for the infected tree. As for Social Security, the Democrats fail to see that I. earned. my. paycheck. To withhold from that paycheck without returning it to me is outright theft. If retirement withholdings are to be mandatory, let me control the withholdings. I earned the money. To prohibit such is to control the fruits of my labor, and the Constitution, which you love to proclaim your support for when it comes to judges, prohibits that. Las Borderales - The Minuteman Project has been proclaiming success in their efforts to secure the border. Beg your pardon, guys, but I respectfully disagree. Your goals, whether you realize them or not, are threefold:
You've succeeded on at least the first point, perhaps even the second. But the third, I'm afraid, remains untouched. Now you want to do the same on the Northern border. Well, good luck to you guys, but in your zeal for security don't forget that the Southern border still needs the permanent presence of the Feds. Unknown Blog - Welcome to the World Wide Weird. A repository of strange stuff found on the Internet. I want my own shrinking machine. Good Bond News - Pierce Brosnan will remain as James Bond. Though he's a good actor, I hope he is eventually replaced by Clive Owen. Guns in bars - Recently, the Arizona legislature passed, and Governor Napolitano vetoed, a bill that would allow for the carry of firearms in liquor serving establishments. The NRA's take on the issue was that you need a gun to defend yourself in a bar, where alcohol-induced fights are more likely to take place. The Democrat Party's position is that its unsafe because someone with a weapon might get drunk enough to use it. At first, I thought the governor was right, as a drunk with a gun is more dangerous than a sober person with one. Then I read the article and found that the armed were prohibited from imbibing. In other words, Steve Benson has again shown that his cartoons are irrelevant as well as unfunny. The NRA brings up a good point: if I was in a bar (about a twice a decade occurrence) and got in a fight (about a twice per lifetime occurrence), I'd want something to defend myself with besides the barstool. However, I don't want the drunk who picks a fight with me to be armed with a gun. I suggest the following: allow weapons, but prohibit concealment and prohibit alcohol consumption by the armed. That way the weapons are in the hands of the sober, who are better equipped, mentally and physically, to stop a fight if it breaks out. Its also clear who is allowed to drink and who isn't. It preserves the ability of people to defend themselves, but keeps all patrons safe. |
Toys |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This site is copyright 2001-2005 by Matthew Maynard. All rights reserved. All your trademarks, copyrights, insignia, and other distinguishing characteristics are belong to you. Sharks in suits make for good joke material. Don't leave a mess on your way out. Links to external websites are valid at the time of article authoring and may decay as time goes by. But we'll always have Paris. The opinions on this site are those of their author and do not represent anyone else's views. That is, unless and until you agree with them, at which point they become yours as well. Opinions expressed in the comments belong to the comment poster and may be edited for content. Play nice with others, since you want them to play nice with you. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
