Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
A Bill To Punish Cops That Interfere With Photographers? Interesting.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Retro" data-source="post: 437199" data-attributes="member: 37517"><p>I'm an old Bircher, so I'm somewhat schooled in the political philosophy of this discussion. Most of what I know comes from The New American. I'm no longer Right-wing; I've since become a die-hard Libertarian, but I still stand by a lot of what I learned from the JBS.</p><p></p><p>One opinion I read the TNA was by the editor. He argued against the Bill of Rights, and specifically the 2nd Amendment. He argued that the document undermined the sufficiency of the Constitution, and set a very bad precedent, which was followed by the Christian Coalition with their campaign in '94, and support for term limits. It's hard for me to argue with him, but yet, the intent behind such laws tends to give some power to their enforcement, at least for a time, through the passion exhibited by their advocates. The problem is the acquiescence to the positive rights theory, which is only a hint in the 2nd Amendment, but detracts attention from the Constitution itself.</p><p></p><p>A major change occurred with the Bill of Rights. Patriots no longer demanded that proponents of a law show them in the Constitution where the government had the authority to pass such, but now pointed to an amendment as a specific prohibition. It's like the Bill of Rights became the Constitution.</p><p></p><p>Understanding that no government can be trusted to abide by a piece of paper, Lysander Spooner opposed the very idea of a constitution. He said "The Constitution has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it."</p><p></p><p>Randy Barnett is probably the foremost authority on Spooner. His website is <a href="http://www.LysanderSpooner.org" target="_blank">LysanderSpooner.org | Lysander Spooner: Lawyer, abolitionist, entrepreneur, and legal theorist</a>, and he wrote <u><strong>The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law</strong></u>, and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Restoring-Lost-Constitution-Presumption-Liberty/dp/0691123764/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1249851396&sr=1-1" target="_blank">Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty</a>.</p><p></p><p>While I won't agree with everything Spooner or Barnett wrote (eg. natural law), I highly recommend these resources. Everyone is wrong about something, but we still have to move forward, and we must do so with the best material and resources we have available, and hope that errors will be dealt with along the way.</p><p></p><p>In conclusion, I cannot come down on one side or the other with the law protecting photographers. What we are looking at is such a mess that there is no easy solution. When your neighbor calls the cops on you for 'sneaking around with a camera,' obviously government is not the only problem.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Retro, post: 437199, member: 37517"] I'm an old Bircher, so I'm somewhat schooled in the political philosophy of this discussion. Most of what I know comes from The New American. I'm no longer Right-wing; I've since become a die-hard Libertarian, but I still stand by a lot of what I learned from the JBS. One opinion I read the TNA was by the editor. He argued against the Bill of Rights, and specifically the 2nd Amendment. He argued that the document undermined the sufficiency of the Constitution, and set a very bad precedent, which was followed by the Christian Coalition with their campaign in '94, and support for term limits. It's hard for me to argue with him, but yet, the intent behind such laws tends to give some power to their enforcement, at least for a time, through the passion exhibited by their advocates. The problem is the acquiescence to the positive rights theory, which is only a hint in the 2nd Amendment, but detracts attention from the Constitution itself. A major change occurred with the Bill of Rights. Patriots no longer demanded that proponents of a law show them in the Constitution where the government had the authority to pass such, but now pointed to an amendment as a specific prohibition. It's like the Bill of Rights became the Constitution. Understanding that no government can be trusted to abide by a piece of paper, Lysander Spooner opposed the very idea of a constitution. He said "The Constitution has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it." Randy Barnett is probably the foremost authority on Spooner. His website is [url=http://www.LysanderSpooner.org]LysanderSpooner.org | Lysander Spooner: Lawyer, abolitionist, entrepreneur, and legal theorist[/url], and he wrote [U][B]The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law[/B][/U], and [URL="http://www.amazon.com/Restoring-Lost-Constitution-Presumption-Liberty/dp/0691123764/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1249851396&sr=1-1"]Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty[/URL]. While I won't agree with everything Spooner or Barnett wrote (eg. natural law), I highly recommend these resources. Everyone is wrong about something, but we still have to move forward, and we must do so with the best material and resources we have available, and hope that errors will be dealt with along the way. In conclusion, I cannot come down on one side or the other with the law protecting photographers. What we are looking at is such a mess that there is no easy solution. When your neighbor calls the cops on you for 'sneaking around with a camera,' obviously government is not the only problem. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
A Bill To Punish Cops That Interfere With Photographers? Interesting.
Top
