71–80 of 366 posts
I doubt there is a country on this planet the US government can't strike a deal with to get his ass back and into prison. However we all have to be grateful for what he did regardless I sure it wasn't an easy decision to make. Good luck Edward and don't make any mistakes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't disagree with you on the importance of the 1st and 4th amendments. I think the ACLU and EFF will indeed become stronger. I don't know of any 2nd amendment supporters who are also not strong 1st and 4th supporters, the issue comes down to how their voice is heard. Also I don't know any of them who who wouldn't rather change things peacefully, it is a much better solution.
> I don't know of any 2nd amendment supporters who are also not strong 1st and 4th supporters Are you sure? For instance, on cultural grounds, I'd guess that there are plenty of 2nd amendment supporters who would be happy to ban flag-burning...
As a strict constructionist, I affirm the right of anyone to burn any flag, anyone to "protest" at a funeral, as well as PRISM being unconstitutional. Further, I believe that there is not an explicit "right to privacy" and therefore there is not a right to privacy. Them's my blinders!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Governments have to be kept in check. They're granted great power and people who have power tend to abuse it. My understanding is that the founding fathers were realists and recognised this very early on.
Having guns does little to hold government in chech. A well educated, well informed, and politically active populace on the other hand is a strait jacket. Which is why free assembly and free speech are so important.
Look at what happens to every group of well-educated, well-informed, politically active people when they go up against an authority. Look at the Prague Spring (speaking of holding the government in Czech), at Occupy Oakland, and what's happened in Turkey most recently. Free speech and free assembly merely mean that you can call the jackbooted thugs names as they crack open the heads of you and your friends.
Further, consider that the trends in education, mass media, and overall American culture have very nearly destroyed the ability to field a group of people meeting any of the three criteria for your 'strait jacket'. We've done such a bangup job of driving social networks and short action-reward loops in our advertising and communication that we have a populace with such a low attention span that it's hard to stay angry long enough to cause trouble.
On the other hand, the 2nd amendment speaks for itself. At the risk of being particularly cynical, I imagine that it is far, far easier to find a hundred thugs who can be talked into taking potshots at the Man than it is to find one who can carefully and consistently explain why the government is doing wrong, what the exact nature of the wrong is, and how to fix it.
We cherish the 2nd precisely because, at the end of the day, you get a lot further with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone.
If you don't believe me, ask the men in Washington.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not true. Even US citizens capptured in Afghanistan fighting for the Taliban were transferred out of gitmo.
But non-US citizens can liberally have their basic human rights denied. 12 years after 9/11. That's the land of the free for you. (Looking at how Bradley Manning was treated even shows that US citizens aren't treated much better. Being denied a lawyer and confined to solitary cells for months is not much different from torture.)
It is strange that the same country which cherishes its 'right to bear arms' on the grounds that it gives them a level of protection that the government is unable to provide is 'happy' to build the infrastructure which allows the same government to peek into their lives. On the one hand, we don't trust the government with the basics (physical security). On the other, we trust them with information we don't want our p…
The right to bear arms is also, explicitly, a protection against tyranny BY the government. Thomas Jefferson: ""When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I live in Scandinavia and I don't think most people here see the US in the same light as China and Russia. But, OTOTH, I do think most people see Europe as more open than the US. It's not like it's a unique and magical "land of the free" like some people seem to believe.
My overall, fact-less impression is that the UK has already cast a pretty wide public surveillance net. They don't seem to be actually using it for enforcing anything, however. I don't think I would blink twice if it turns out they have a PRISM-like operation going on.
Americans might not realise this but we see the USA in the same light as China and Russia when it comes to freedoms. We might be wrong, but thats the perception myself and many other people from outside the USA see the current state of the situation. To think anyone would feel safe in the USA is ridiculous, the USA is one of the last places anyone should seek refuge in modern times. What scares me most is the United…
Have to agree on this. USA has lost it's appeal for me for quite some time now. For me the countries that I'd like to live in the most are Switzerland, Canada, Australia (I don't know about the US influence there much though), maybe Germany or other similar Western European state, but certainly not US. I live in Eastern Europe btw.
Americans might not realise this but we see the USA in the same light as China and Russia when it comes to freedoms. We might be wrong, but thats the perception myself and many other people from outside the USA see the current state of the situation. To think anyone would feel safe in the USA is ridiculous, the USA is one of the last places anyone should seek refuge in modern times. What scares me most is the United…
I feel perfectly safe. This whole entire issue about the government collecting meta-data is overblown IMO. And comparing it to tyranny and demanding rioting on the streets is literally self-destructive and utmost retarded.
Maybe you need to compare it to a country like the Republic of Congo to get an idea of what's safe and what's not. But instead the majority of people here sit in their comfortable chair in front of the computer fantasizing about how much they hate the government and how much the government must hate them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having guns does little to hold government in chech. A well educated, well informed, and politically active populace on the other hand is a strait jacket. Which is why free assembly and free speech are so important.
I agree a well educated and informed society is the best deterrent to keeping governments serving the best interest of the people. Yet recent events have shown that we are not that well informed by our media and government on purpose. Guns are not a deterrent in as much as a means to allow the people to defend themselves against an abusive government when and if needed.