floplag

this is a new level of ridiculous...

I'm hearing flashbacks from the movie Demolition Man in my head...
I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener".

And are you saying you want to live in a place where people can be murdered and tried by propaganda after the fact? I don't. Innocent until proven guilty, public trial by jury, right to confront witnesses, these are good things and need to apply all the time. Proactive freedom does not exist.

It has already been established by many here that they have no problem with this idea on foreign ground.. so im sure it wont matter domestically as expected.

Personally this disgusts me on many levels not the least of which being it is a giant overstep of the federal government in terms of jurisdiction.

Innocent until proven guilty? Have you not looked at sexual assault cases? The man is ALWAYS guilty until proven innocent. Everybody talks about all these rights that American citizens have and how the Constitution protects them and they're glad for their rights, but are they actually effective? No, they're not. Our Constitution needs to be rewritten to roll with modern times. It's not 1781 anymore, guns shoot more than 1 bullet every 2 minutes and 90% of the population ISN'T a Puritan. America's Constitution (Amend it!) needs to get with the times.

Not sure i agree with the examples here, but i wish to ask about the issue of amending the constitution...

The question i have to ask is, per whose ideals?

The ideals this country was founded on should be simple absolutes... there are no elongated parameters set to the concept of due process, free speech, freedom of religion.. these are extraordinarily simple ideals. 

We have already tried over the years to interpret them to deatch and bend them to fit whoever is in power, se HR 247 as a wonderful example of how something can be interpreted in an extermely bad way and be very legal in doing so.. for those not familiar is basically can make it a crime to protest in any area where Obama is present.  This is an extreme interpretation of it, but it is also not innacurate.  Of course this was not panned at all on his board to the surprise of precisely noone.

What im getting at is basically who gets to make that call?  1 judge?  a small group of old closed minded people in the SCOTUS?  Congress in the lobbysints pockets?  public referrendum?  executive priviledge?  All any of that does is limit something that should only be limited by common sense and responsibility.

This might be the one time in history that i would agree with the whole less is more nonsense.

On the old forums we hada discussion about drone strikes and due process... im curious how some will feel about that now based on this article.. though im sure i already know the answer:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/politics/obama-drones-cia/index.html

..and where is this money coming from?  the Obamacare surplus?

Why not gear it to higher education, why lock our people into blue collar professions?

I applaud the idea, i guess, but im not sure about its merits

end it, as soon as you pay back the money ive put into it, sure.

why does that just get taken from me and written off?

we really should start issueing skirts to go with the cups in sports i guess.  This is getting ridiculous.  Oh and Posey's injury was his own fault, he uused bad form, if he had vlocked the plate properly he wouldnt have gotten hurt.

 

Why should they care about spending cuts when it doesnt affect their salaries?  I mean the people affected by it will suffer, but they sure as hell wont?
 

i see its already been poo poo'd..

with Granderson out till May at least, i wonder if the Yanks might come calling again?

Soriano more likely if anything i know... but hey, its not that far fetched.

Explain this to me, Gun Nuts.  I was watching a show on National Geographic about a gun auction and they were in Colorado.  A guy sold a Mack 10 with a suppressor on it.

 

So why is a fully automatic text book sized sub machine gun that is nearly silent legal?

why shouldnt they be is the better question?  nd dont even try to say it will stop crime, it wont.. and even these tragic acts arent likely to be affected.  there is zero evidence to support either claim.