General Categories > Laws and Legislation
S. 1867-National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 how much does anyone know?
OnTheFly:
I agree with jthhapkido, bkoenig, and CitizenClark. These are rights that all people have regardless of where they are or what country they are in. We may not be able to guarantee an accused person a speedy trial when they are being tried under the laws of a foreign government, but we can avoid violating the inalienable rights of these people while they are in our custody.
That's why I fully support hiring companies like the former Blackwater to go in and sort it all out. ;D Kidding of course.
Fly
DanClrk51:
--- Quote from: OnTheFly on December 09, 2011, 12:19:05 PM ---I agree with jthhapkido, bkoenig, and CitizenClark. These are rights that all people have regardless of where they are or what country they are in. We may not be able to guarantee an accused person a speedy trial when they are being tried under the laws of a foreign government, but we can avoid violating the inalienable rights of these people while they are in our custody.
Kidding of course.
Fly
--- End quote ---
+1
Ronvandyn:
--- Quote from: CitizenClark on December 09, 2011, 11:21:19 AM ---Ron, the U.S. Constitution acts to restrain the federal government no matter where it is operating. It isn't a matter of applying US law to people in other countries. If the United States government does not have the authority to do a particular thing, that doesn't merely limit US government actions here in the territory of the United States. It limits them everywhere.
--- End quote ---
Yes, I know. It limits the government and its actions. But it does not protect those people residing outside of our nation and its territories, no matter what their citizenship is. The idea of “inalienable rights” is a misnomer, different countries have their own ideas of what people’s rights are and apply them according to their understanding of those rights. Many nations try to emulate what we are lucky enough to have here, but none actually duplicate it. Unfortunately many more nations ignore what we have and go with their own versions of “human rights”, which occasionally gets some our citizens in deep poopoo.
One thing that many “pro rights” folks miss when discussing the constitution is that the founding fathers also defined the responsibilities of the government to its citizens. They laid the groundwork for what governments is supposed to do for us since we are paying the bills and providing it with workers. They laid out how they are to represent our interests, protect us, and provide for our ability to seek our own paths in life without undue regulation. Personally, I think they did a far better job giving us direction than we have in following it. But that’s another story…
Ron
Roper:
I have a question into Senator Johanns as to why he supported this amendment and the bill. We'll see if I get a response.
CitizenClark:
--- Quote from: OnTheFly on December 09, 2011, 12:19:05 PM ---I agree with jthhapkido, bkoenig, and CitizenClark. These are rights that all people have regardless of where they are or what country they are in. We may not be able to guarantee an accused person a speedy trial when they are being tried under the laws of a foreign government, but we can avoid violating the inalienable rights of these people while they are in our custody.
That's why I fully support hiring companies like the former Blackwater to go in and sort it all out. ;D Kidding of course.
Fly
--- End quote ---
The enumerated powers of the federal government in Art. I, sec. 8 to declare war and issue letters of marque and reprisal notwithstanding, I'm not a fan of sending government troops or government-hired private troops anywhere but home. I'm all for protecting the right to hire mercenaries in one's private capacity, however. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version