ATF: Plot to kill Obama is foiled

[Ling Ling 22]

Actually...there are no laws against a person having criminal thoughts per se.

There are laws against 2 or more people planning a crime. That's called a conspiracy.

You're free to think inside your head, whatever evil thoughts you would like, but once you share them with someone else,

and/or begin to plan or entertain a course of action you know to be illegal, you have committed the criminal act of conspiracy.

That said, there should be a law against anyone who would give up their freedom and liberties to gain some security.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin, such a person "deserves neither".

One of the founding principles of the USA is freedom...specifically, freedom from warrant-less search and seizure.

[Heracles 417]

Must be hitting a nerve there by showing how stupid his arguments are if he's going out of his way and getting further desperate to try and insult me like that.

You will find your answer here: http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...t&p=2341573

PS I hope you paid attention to my post above..

I will give you this SVRT. The constitution does not mean much to me and never will. Hence why I will not become a citizen and will only stay a resident. While I respect this country's laws, I don't have to agree with some of them. I am certainly not like other people's spouses who are here for a green card or to obtain citizenship; to get them out of their shitty little lives in their crappy countries.

[Heracles 417]

Actually...there are no laws against a person having criminal thoughts per se.

There are laws against 2 or more people planning a crime. That's called a conspiracy.

You're free to think inside your head, whatever evil thoughts you would like, but once you share them with someone else,

and/or begin to plan or entertain a course of action you know to be illegal, you have committed the criminal act of conspiracy.

That said, there should be a law against anyone who would give up their freedom and liberties to gain some security.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin, such a person "deserves neither".

One of the founding principles of the USA is freedom...specifically, freedom from warrant-less search and seizure.

The issue I have with this is that crime is rampant in this country. So many areas are simply no go zones, especially at night. While this is acceptable in Sudan or certain cities in South America, this should not be acceptable in 2008 United States. The police need the power to do their job. Nothing more nothing less. Applying principals and laws enacted in a totally different era is just silly and has led to the status quo here. The police, for example, should have the right to search and question a car load of gang bangers driving around at 2:00am in an area know for violence and murders.

If you took most crime ridden American cities and dropped them in a country like Aus, the crime would go down and the offenders would be swiftly dealt with. Why? because the laws are dynamic. Adjusted to suit the crime and world we live in.

Edited October 28, 2008 by Aficionado

[HAL 9000 96]

To which this is the rational response.

[Ling Ling 22]

Actually...there are no laws against a person having criminal thoughts per se.

There are laws against 2 or more people planning a crime. That's called a conspiracy.

You're free to think inside your head, whatever evil thoughts you would like, but once you share them with someone else,

and/or begin to plan or entertain a course of action you know to be illegal, you have committed the criminal act of conspiracy.

That said, there should be a law against anyone who would give up their freedom and liberties to gain some security.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin, such a person "deserves neither".

One of the founding principles of the USA is freedom...specifically, freedom from warrant-less search and seizure.

The issue I have with this is that crime is rampant in this country. So many areas are simply no go zones, especially at night. While this is acceptable in Sudan or certain cities in South America, this should not be acceptable in 2008 United States. The police need the power to do their job. Nothing more nothing less. Applying principals and laws enacted in a totally different era is just silly and has led to the status quo here. The police, for example, should have the right to search and question a car load of gang bangers driving around at 2:00am in an area know for violence and murders.

If you took most crime ridden American cities and dropped them in a country like Aus, the crime would go down and the offenders would be swiftly dealt with. Why? because the laws are dynamic. Adjusted to suit the crime and world we live in.

Well maybe we all need to help the police more. Maybe we should all watch our neighbors, and go through their garbage, and read their shredded mail, so we can make this a safer country.

The police do have the right to search and question a car load of gang bangers if they have Probable Cause...but not by profiling.

So should the police have the right to search and question a car load of White upper-middle class teenagers driving around at 1:00pm in an area known for having all imaginable drugs readily available for sale (aka Suburbs)?

Or how about people in an area known for having people who teach Darwanism, or Scientology, or Intelligent Design?

What about people in an area known for thinking radical thoughts, or just an area known for people that want to criticize the government?

Personally, I don't want to live in a police state. I prefer the ideal of due process, and protection from warrant-less search and seizure.

If you think you'd be safer living in a police state, feel free to have at it. That's another freedom you have in America,

the freedom to get the ** out.

[Heracles 417]

To which this is the rational response.

You know what cracks me up about you guys. That in your mind you are the logic one and the others are illogical. Have you ever pondered that the others probably think the same about you.

Another point. How many people around the world would you say, do you personally think, share the liberal American view? If numbers were the litmus test for logic, liberal Americans would fail.

I never bother bringing up how illogical and incoherent you guys are because it is a stupid argument and solely based on a matter of perception.

Edited October 28, 2008 by Aficionado

[HAL 9000 96]

Actually...there are no laws against a person having criminal thoughts per se.

There are laws against 2 or more people planning a crime. That's called a conspiracy.

You're free to think inside your head, whatever evil thoughts you would like, but once you share them with someone else,

and/or begin to plan or entertain a course of action you know to be illegal, you have committed the criminal act of conspiracy.

That said, there should be a law against anyone who would give up their freedom and liberties to gain some security.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin, such a person "deserves neither".

One of the founding principles of the USA is freedom...specifically, freedom from warrant-less search and seizure.

The issue I have with this is that crime is rampant in this country. So many areas are simply no go zones, especially at night. While this is acceptable in Sudan or certain cities in South America, this should not be acceptable in 2008 United States. The police need the power to do their job. Nothing more nothing less. Applying principals and laws enacted in a totally different era is just silly and has led to the status quo here. The police, for example, should have the right to search and question a car load of gang bangers driving around at 2:00am in an area know for violence and murders.

If you took most crime ridden American cities and dropped them in a country like Aus, the crime would go down and the offenders would be swiftly dealt with. Why? because the laws are dynamic. Adjusted to suit the crime and world we live in.

They frequently do so. They also do so with the carloads of suburbanites frequenting city areas known for drug selling.

[HAL 9000 96]

To which this is the rational response.

You know what cracks me up about you guys. That in your mind you are the logic one and the others are illogical. Have you ever pondered that the others probably think the same about you.

Another point. How many people around the world would you say, do you personally think, share the liberal American view? If numbers were the litmus test for logic, liberal Americans would fail.

I never bother bringing up how illogical and incoherent you guys are because it is a stupid argument and solely based on a matter of perception.

Well you are always cracking up about some "you guys."

As for defining liberal views...again, you need to have some sort of clarity for defining politics, economics, matters of authority, and individual rights. Which to this point you FAIL.

You're not really adding anything.

[Ling Ling 22]

They frequently do so. They also do so with the carloads of suburbanites frequenting city areas known for drug selling.

I get your point sir, but need to add...that was the '80s. Suburbs are full of intelligent kids with a lot of time on their hands, dumb parents, and plain old entrepreneurs. They don't have to drive all the way to the dangerous inner-city any more....some even have deliveries.

[Heracles 417]

Well maybe we all need to help the police more. Maybe we should all watch our neighbors, and go through their garbage, and read their shredded mail, so we can make this a safer country.

The police do have the right to search and question a car load of gang bangers if they have Probable Cause...but not by profiling.

So should the police have the right to search and question a car load of White upper-middle class teenagers driving around at 1:00pm in an area known for having all imaginable drugs readily available for sale (aka Suburbs)?

Or how about people in an area known for having people who teach Darwanism, or Scientology, or Intelligent Design?

What about people in an area known for thinking radical thoughts, or just an area known for people that want to criticize the government?

Personally, I don't want to live in a police state. I prefer the ideal of due process, and protection from warrant-less search and seizure.

If you think you'd be safer living in a police state, feel free to have at it. That's another freedom you have in America,

the freedom to get the ** out.

That is just paranoia though. That the government is out to get you guys. Time to travel to other first world nations and realize that the government is, in those nations, there to help people. Want to know the difference.. They elect people who actually know what they are doing. They certainly don't go electing criminals like their brother Marion Barry in again.

That's another freedom you have in America,

the freedom to get the ** out.

Funny how African Americans never took this up and would rather ###### and whine poor me rather than going to Africa; where their distant cousins get to drink milk once a week. And have to walk 20 miles for a bucket of water.

Then again they have made America right at home. A #### whole like their mother country.

Edited October 28, 2008 by Aficionado

[HAL 9000 96]

They frequently do so. They also do so with the carloads of suburbanites frequenting city areas known for drug selling.

I get your point sir, but need to add...that was the '80s. Suburbs are full of intelligent kids with a lot of time on their hands, dumb parents, and plain old entrepreneurs. They don't have to drive all the way to the dangerous inner-city any more....some even have deliveries.

Yeah! There are plenty of smart dealers that have moved out into the burbs. Expanded the business where the demand is high.

[Heracles 417]

Well you are always cracking up about some "you guys."

As for defining liberal views...again, you need to have some sort of clarity for defining politics, economics, matters of authority, and individual rights. Which to this point you FAIL.

You're not really adding anything.

You know exactly who 'you guys' talks about in his forum. So why are you playing dumb.

[HAL 9000 96]

Well maybe we all need to help the police more. Maybe we should all watch our neighbors, and go through their garbage, and read their shredded mail, so we can make this a safer country.

The police do have the right to search and question a car load of gang bangers if they have Probable Cause...but not by profiling.

So should the police have the right to search and question a car load of White upper-middle class teenagers driving around at 1:00pm in an area known for having all imaginable drugs readily available for sale (aka Suburbs)?

Or how about people in an area known for having people who teach Darwanism, or Scientology, or Intelligent Design?

What about people in an area known for thinking radical thoughts, or just an area known for people that want to criticize the government?

Personally, I don't want to live in a police state. I prefer the ideal of due process, and protection from warrant-less search and seizure.

If you think you'd be safer living in a police state, feel free to have at it. That's another freedom you have in America,

the freedom to get the ** out.

That is just paranoia though. That the government is out to get you guys. Time to travel to other first world nations and realize that the government is, in those nations, there to help people. Want to know the difference.. They elect people who actually know what they are doing. They certainly don't go electing criminals like their brother Marion Barry in again.

That's another freedom you have in America,

the freedom to get the ** out.

Funny how African Americans never took this up and would rather ###### and whine poor me rather than going to Africa; where their distant cousins get to drink milk once a week. And have to walk 20 miles for a bucket of water.

Then again they have made America right at home. A #### whole like their mother country.

Overgeneralize much?

Nothing new of course.

Well you are always cracking up about some "you guys."

As for defining liberal views...again, you need to have some sort of clarity for defining politics, economics, matters of authority, and individual rights. Which to this point you FAIL.

You're not really adding anything.

You know exactly who 'you guys' talks about in his forum. So why are you playing dumb.

Because its funny seeing you get wound up on your "BY vs everyone else" crusade of logic.

[Heracles 417]

Overgeneralize much?

Nothing new of course.

Which part is over generalizing?

[HAL 9000 96]

Overgeneralize much?

Nothing new of course.

Which part is over generalizing?

Here:

"That is just paranoia though. That the government is out to get you guys. Time to travel to other first world nations and realize that the government is, in those nations, there to help people. Want to know the difference.. They elect people who actually know what they are doing. They certainly don't go electing criminals like their brother Marion Barry in again."

and here:

"Funny how African Americans never took this up and would rather ###### and whine poor me rather than going to Africa; where their distant cousins get to drink milk once a week. And have to walk 20 miles for a bucket of water.

Then again they have made America right at home. A #### whole like their mother country."