Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
I consider the murder of kops less tragic than the murder of a citizen...
The kops, like a fireman, sign on knowing that the job carries risk and their salary reflects that risk..
And that doesn't even take into account my personal disdain of their chosen profession...
So, 5 cops to protect their own green zone entrance. How much longer before sandbags, concertina wire and mobile barricades?“No less than 5 MOS (members of service) are guarding precinct doors. Emergency services are being dispatched to all precincts citywide until further notice,” the source added.
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
This is, almost predictably, the worst possible timing for something like this.
Follow me on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
I am an investigative journalist for Ben Swann's Truth in Media
Check out my liberty-friendly experimental rock/punk/metal band Look What I Did
Does every cop used militarized equipment and break into people's homes and so forth?
I doubt it.
Mind you, I agree that they should quit. Or at least refuse to enforce any laws against victimless crimes, which would lead to them getting fired unless enough of them did it.
I am still wrestling internally with this whole issue, but I am absolutely certain I at least some level agree with tod.
Say two people get into a fight and one kills the other. At some level we understand when this happens. I'm not saying its excusable or that there's no punishment, but at some level its humanly understandable.
Its also humanly understandable why soldiers kill other soldiers on the field of battle, even though it sucks and is generally immoral when it happens (note that I said "generally.")
On the other hand, we generally see it as monstrous, unthinkable, when some guy goes out and kills some random person, especially a woman or child.
Police have, like it or not, think its justified or not, chosen a profession in which they are going to be in conflict with other people. Even if you say the police are completely justified in what they are doing (which I view as an absurd stance to take) they still did choose at some level to engage in combat with other people. I don't know, it seems far more understandable to me why someone would decide to kill a cop than it is for someone to go after a random person who has nothing to do with them in any way. Note that I am NOT saying that makes it OK. But I do get it. That of course would make the "pro law and order" Republicans hate me, but I'm not putting myself in the "its OK to kill cops whenever" camp either. I know you are intelligent enough to understand the nuance of what I'm saying. Most Republicans aren't, which is why I try to avoid talking to them most of the time, because they are aggravating.
This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading
There are varying degrees of "screw the cops" positions. I don't think we should go around killing cops, and not just because its not practical. I do think that doing so would be ethically wrong. At the same time, I do think that when you decide to take on the badge of a criminal gang, at some level you take responsibility for your actions.
I don't know enough about oathkeepers to comment. If they actually think that police as they currently stand are constitutional and good at ANY level I'd say they are still well-meaning parts of the problem.
On the other hand, if they are knowingly going behind enemy (government) lines to subvert the enemy, I think they need to understand that unless we know exactly who they are and what they are doing, they take on the risks associated with the position.
Is it a tragedy when a well-meaning cop gets killed? Yes. But does it put anger in my soul the way someone who indiscriminately kills civilians does? No, maybe it should but its not. Its kind of like (though this analogy probably makes the cops look better than they should) I continually slap you across the face and you eventually just snap. Is it "OK"? Not really. Is it understandable? Yeah, why the heck did I think repetatively doing that to you would be a good idea?
And really, the cops, knowingly or not, do far worse than slapping people across the face. They steal and they kidnap. I acknowledge that their ignorance is a mitigating factor, which is why I don't advocate "taking war to them" so to speak, and my Christian faith gives me a little bit of charity there that I understand why non-Christians would not be interested in having, but they still aren't "innocents." This scenario, to be blunt, is not comparable to two children who are playing ball in their backyards getting shot by a sociopath who just likes watching people die. It isn't. The victims were likely victims at SOME LEVEL, but they are by no means "innocent", even by the limited standard of non-aggression.
I know my middle ground position isn't going to win me any friends either among those who want to hold out that there may be some "good cops", nor among those who want to start shooting yesterday. I'm willing to discuss further and refine based on logic and scripture, as I regularly do. And I love the opportunity to do it with the intelligent people of RPF that are actually thinking as opposed to the zombies that dominate the rest of my life.
That goes for the people here who don't count military as well.
This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading
I know Ferguson was complicated and its hard to sort out what happened beyond a reasonable doubt (note that I am NOT asserting Wilson's innocence nor am I saying he shouldn't have been indicted). But, the fact that the Garner case didn't even get an indictment, and that even the killers of Kelly Thomas somehow managed to walk out when it was even less open to debate than Garner, proves that the system is broken. Even if these were the ONLY cases in which that happened, I would say the system is broken. There is video evidence. These criminals MUST be brought to justice, and the system can't do it. I'm not going to do it, but I wouldn't blame someone who decided he needed to do so, nor could I convict him in good conscience.
I can see room for constructive debate on whether there are ways to MAKE the system work, and how to go about doing that, but the fact that it isn't working now seems beyond undeniable to me. I honestly want to slap the people (NAP purists forgive me) who try to tell me "the system works." I usually content myself with just laughing at them, and then giving fake apologies for doing so, because they really are idiots. And I know a lot of otherwise intelligent people who are moronic on this issue.
I'm getting to the point where I only want to discuss political issues with people who at least SORT OF agree with me on this. I enjoy talking to people like TC, who probably think the system can somehow be reformed electorally, I enjoy talking to the fringe like Cantwell who want to take violent action now, and I enjoy talking to pacifists who just wouldn't use violence ever, though I don't agree with any of those positions (note that this is not an exhaustive list of people I enjoy talking to, I'm making a point.) But I don't get any enjoyment anymore out of debating with people or trying to get them to see that don't think there is at least some moral questionability about working as one of the government's enforcers, and that the system is messed up. I'm just getting exhausted and tired of it. What's the point? Bless their hearts, they are morons and not worth my time.
This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading
Are people from other countries less human?
No offense tod, but this is the one black mark on an otherwise excellently consistent position (though one I don't agree with.)
Don't doubt for a second that the military will be used against us. Some people will refuse to comply, but others definitely will.
But all of them are government employees.
The weird thing that I don't understand about you, you seem to have more contempt for the janitor or the clerk at a random government building that gets his money from taxation but doesn't personally engage in any violence than you do for the military.
Why is this? It makes no sense to me. It dumbfounds me. I've got no qualms with someone who takes money from the thieves, though I hope they are benefiting from the transaction more than they are giving back. I do have qualms with people who are willing and able to go kill foreigners when the orders are given, just as I have qualms with people who are willing to imprison, rob, and even kill peaceful Americans when the order is given.
Is there really an ethical difference? Or do you just value Americans more because you are one?
This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading
No.
So what?
Did the lowly Unterscharführer at some remote supply depot personally march undesirables into the gas chambers?
No.
Did he wear the uniform and is he part of the system that did?
Yes.
Therefore is he culpable for the actions of his fellow man?
Yes.
I am, in my career, held to task and must comply with laws and regulations that have been enacted as a response to incidents, accidents and negligence of my peers, even though I have no control whatsoever over what they did.
All country's need a military, to what extent is debatable..
I actually kind of lean toward the Swiss method of national defense but the necessity of defense isn't something I consider ripe for debate..
I've noticed that you seem to view the military as individuals who engage in evil doings whereas I view them as nothing more than a tool of government...
In my view the military, as a tool, is more important than the "Just-Us" system in it's entirety including the janitor.
The politicians who wield the tool of military might are not worthy of being drawn and quartered, they deserve far worse in my opinion....
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
We do need defense. We also need justice. I think we both agree that justice is a necessity in society. The question is whether the Just-Us system is actually giving us justice, and the answer is no.
If the military are a tool, why aren't the police? Why one and not the other?
I would respect a position that demonizes both and essentially says both should be shot on sight. I wouldn't agree, but you'd be consistent.
But to say that about police and then sort of excuse the military is inconsistent, just like it would be inconsistent were it the other way around.
This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading
Are you saying you SHOULD be held responsible for things you had no control over?
Was every single Nazi a valid target to kill? I don't know about that. I don't think saying "no" means they are totally innocent either.
The cop who pulls people over for petty traffic infractions because he thinks he's "keeping the roads safe" is a bad guy, but not someone who should be shot.
This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading
I'm not sure "military" is necessarily synonymous with "standing army."
I'd be comfortable saying that some type of professional fighting force is probably necessary (whether the FFs thought so or not) but that doesn't mean it has to be provided in a coercive fashion.
Of course, there's some moral disconnect here for me, in that I think holding nuclear weapons is likely an EFFECTIVE way to avoid an attack, but I still think its IMMORAL for them to exist.
This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading
I've gone over this in the past with you and honestly don't see any sense in derailing this thread any more just to rehash old ground...
I will however address the differences I see between the military and the police;
The military is supposed to be used for national defense whereas the police are used for civil enforcement, to me that's one hell of a disconnect.
Which made perfect sense in the 1700's when any substantial attack would have only arrived via water and when the federal government kept out of foreign affairs.
"Military" to me is open to interpretation so long as its intention is to repel not attack....(I happen to believe this position would be in concert with what the FF intended given their wording at the time.)
freedomisobvious.blogspot.com
There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.
It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.
Our words make us the ghosts that we are.
Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.
Connect With Us