Dem Rep. Snyder Threatened With Assassination

[Fandango 1,440]

So is it ok to threaten a Senator's family? Under your 'not true threat = ok' theory.

Not being snarky, I just wanna know where you draw the line.

[Dan J 277]

In this day and age, we're talking about the wrong type of democracy.

Go read and study the framework of this nation and the constitution. Majority rule was the last thing the founders intended to happen.

The government represents the will of the people. If the people want to do something different than what the founders preferred, than they can do that. If you are in the minority and you disagree with the majority. You have 3 choices. 1. Try to persuade people to make your view the majority view. 2. Put up with the way that the people want the government to run. 3. Find another country to live in.

You can bring up the founders all you want, but the will of the people, not the will of the founders are what matters today. The founders did not prevent the people from reshaping the purpose of government to fit the needs of a changing world.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

If we let a group of people bully others with violence, we might as well rename our country to Afghanistan. As Dan said, violence has no place in a civilized democratic society of today.

Every 'civilized' society is still made up of human beings and those same human beings will make the same mistakes those in the past have made.

Violence and the intent of said violence is what makes a difference. If you're fighting for liberty and freedom it's one thing, if you're fighting for tyrannical rules it's another.

As I said earlier, WWI, WWII, Vietnam, etc... if it weren't for violent action (some of which were staged) the American people would have never gone for certain things in our history.

A bully is always willing to push you around, taunt you, etc. because he doesn't think you'll do the same back to him. You defeat him by swinging at him and showing the world the real cry baby he really is. Granted, some bullies really are such and will fight back, but that's when you flat out kick their #######!

So is it ok to threaten a Senator's family? Under your 'not true threat = ok' theory.

Not being snarky, I just wanna know where you draw the line.

I draw the line on innocent people.

Government officials usually are always far from innocent.

[Dan J 277]

I draw the line on innocent people.

Government officials usually are always far from innocent.

And you are the judge of that? Does just opposing your view make a politician no longer innocent?

Edited March 26, 2010 by Dan + Gemvita

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

And you are the judge of that?

Terrorists always think they are.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

The government represents the will of the people. If the people want to do something different than what the founders preferred, than they can do that. If you are in the minority and you disagree with the majority. You have 3 choices. 1. Try to persuade people to make your view the majority view. 2. Put up with the way that the people want the government to run. 3. Find another country to live in.

You can bring up the founders all you want, but the will of the people, not the will of the founders are what matters today. The founders did not prevent the people from reshaping the purpose of government to fit the needs of a changing world.

I think you need a history lesson. As I said, the last thing that the government wanted was the 'will of the people' to dictate the nation as a whole. This was a dangerous idea and one they were familiar with. It's why the setup a Constitutonal Representative Republic, not a true Democracy.

This is also why the founders were making sure that states could secede if they wanted to. If the 'people' and the legislatures of an individual state did not want to be a part of the union, the founders thought it best for them to have the option to back out, so long as it was in a peaceful manner and it's what the people of that STATE wanted.

The "people" of the nation though were never intended to dicate the rule of law for the ENTIRE nation without a constitutional amendmendment in which there would have to be a 2/3 majority in congress or a 3/4 majority of the states that approved of it.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I think you need a history lesson on what we do to terrorists in this country, Paul. You better hope your ѕhit never escalates beyond words because if that happens, America will make you dead faster than you can say BOO!

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I think you need a history lesson on what we do to terrorists in this country, Paul. You better hope your ѕhit never escalates beyond words because if that happens, America will make you dead faster than you can say BOO!

LOL, I'm still amused what you consider to be a terrorist.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

LOL, I'm still amused what you consider to be a terrorist.

I guess you thought being Muslim was some kind prerequisite.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I sure hope immigration doesn't get wind of what Paul has been saying here.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I sure hope immigration doesn't get wind of what Paul has been saying here.

Why?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I sure hope immigration doesn't get wind of what Paul has been saying here.

and give me an excuse for the lawsuit of the decade? I think not.

No crimes have been committed of any sort, just random spewing on a message board.

[Fandango 1,440]

Threatening physical harm is just atrocious afaic....I get what is being said concerning our history and how war is always in our past and how it worked out to shape who we are as a people. (that may be in the other thread actually, I don't remember now). But at the end of the day, tampering with a politician based on threats of physical harm is no better than buying a vote. It's corrupt. This is not a WWF cage match. Our elected officials work for us, the way to get your message across is to be involved politically. And pursue legal methods when and if something arises. Threaten them with votes lost, not with life lost.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Threaten them with votes lost, not with life lost.

And judging by how a solid bloc of about 30 Dems from conservative districts voted against every HCR vote in the House, it's clear threatening with votes lost actually does work. Yes, sometimes the votes you have to threaten with aren't enough to stop legislation, but that's why we have elections.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I'd be willing to bet that if one of these tough guys here had their family threatened they'd change their tune in a hurry. It wouldn't be a joke or funny just to scare someone then, now would it?