 |
Fred Koschara |
|
Fred Koschara |
|
Most of the people in this country today have no idea what the Revolution was fought for - and they are striving to give up the very rights on which this once great nation was founded. This is a course of action that can only have dire consequences in the long run. Do you think our forefathers fought so that we could live in a "well regulated society" - the objective I've heard politicians and government officials state they are trying to achieve? NO! That is not what the Revolution was fought for! The war that led to the creation of this nation was a battle for liberty and justice for all - and making "law and order" the primary objective of government is in direct conflict with those ideals. I will grant the argument that the United States of America is the best country to live in on the face of the Earth today. It is not, however, the best country that could be. In this page I will be discussing some of the things I see wrong with the country I live in - part of the reason I want to move to space and build a new nation from scratch. This page is a growing document, and will be added to when I have the chance or feel a particular need to discuss some of the threats I perceive from time to time. Table of Contents for this page
An observation by R. Keith Beal: "America - the Land of the Fee and the Home of the Slave..."
No ResponsibilityEveryone is granted rights (by the Declaration of Independence and Constitution). No one is required to uphold the responsibilities that make those rights possible. Society cannot function very long or effectively without Individual Responsibility, wherein each individual assumes the responsibility for their own actions. If an animal refuses to accept the responsibility for its existence, it either dies of starvation, or is eaten by a more aggressive one. How do humans think they can get away with not accepting the same set of rules of existence? Note that the condition of not being responsible for one's own actions is commonly called "insanity." (What does that say about government employees who cannot be held legally responsible for their actions while performing their government jobs?) On a (slightly) lighter note, here is something else to consider: The Bill of No Rights. Return to the top of this page The Right to Own and Bear ArmsThe reason the right to bear arms was put into the Bill of Rights was to protect the population against the government - not to allow citizens to go duck hunting. Even if a well-armed militia were to claim an area of ground as their own, what protection do they have against small thermonuclear weapons - which only the government is "allowed" to have? (Or, for that matter, what protection does an organization have against tanks with flame throwers - does anybody remember Waco?) The Bill of Rights grants citizens the right to own and bear arms. It does not make any limitations on what types of arms a person is allowed to own and carry. It does not say we are allowed to own and bear arms simply for duck hunting. The reason the populace was granted the right to own and bear arms is because the architects of our nation wanted to insure that the government would not become the master of the people: The right to own and bear arms is our ultimate defense against a government that has gone beyond its proper authority - and to rise up in an armed defense against said government. Citizens of the United States of America are Constitutionally granted the right to own assault weapons, 30-round clips, guns in court rooms (such as those carried there by the police every day), and thermonuclear weapons. There are laws both at the national level and in most states which place limits on a person's right to own and bear arms - either through "licensing" requirements, or outright bans. These actions are all UNCONSTITUTIONAL!! The only reason these laws have been allowed to stand is because the nation's population has failed to uphold their responsibility in defending the rights that were granted to us by our forefathers.
The government which fears arms in the hands of its people ... should. Return to the top of this page Punishment For VirtueOur best students are socially outcast by their peers. Workers are chastised by others around them for doing "too good a job" - because the slower ones will then be expected to keep up. Motorists are punished for making the best use of their time and ability while on the road. See my opinions about driving for more about this, and http://www.StopHighwayRobbery.com. Return to the top of this page Criminals RewardedWhere but in jail can you expect top-notch medical and dental attention, color cable TV, room and board, an education, and not have to pay for any of it? Return to the top of this page Government Out of ControlQuick! What are the first three words of the Constitution of the United States of America - the legal document on which all other law in the country is supposed to be based? You've scored points if you answered "We the People." Now, here's the trick question: What three consecutive words in the Constitution are most often ignored by the governments in this country? If 90% of the people on any given stretch of road are driving at speeds over the posted limit, how does the government get to say their limit is in force? Do you know that there is no way for the people of the United States of America to change the Constitution? It can only be done by government action: There is no way a popular referendum can directly amend the Constitution. If you ask me, it's a serious defect that needs to be corrected. Email me if you agree. I think a political action committee is the way to go, but I'm open to listening to any reasonable suggestions. Massachusett's seat belt law - passed by the government after the people voted in a popular referendum against it: UNCONSTITUTIONAL!! When is that going to make a difference? The USA doesn't need a Gestapo - it's got the IRS. For more about taxes, be sure to visit the taxes section of my Philosopy page. As long as police officers can lie on the witness stand and get away with it, there is little hope for successful defense within the law. It's been my observation the reason they are granted the title "expert witness" is they have more experience presenting false testimony without hesitiation than does the "common man." I'm not saying that all police officers lie on the stand all the time - just the ones I've had opportunity to observe in court. "We the people" really have no control over government spending: Even with special interest groups, political action committees, and lobbying efforts, there are lots of other things going on to distract the politicians who are spending your tax dollars. (Expensive dinners? Trips to other countries with products putting Americans out of work? Some of these things make bribery, kickbacks and liquor seem innocent by comparison!) How else is it that taxes taken from the working public are spent to support those who will not (i.e., refuse to) work? Even NASA, once the pride and joy of so many Americans, has become a bloated pig snarfling up everything around it: The space shuttle, once touted as the way the cost of access to space would be decreased, is the most expensive launch system in the world. (Will the X-33 be any better?) Look at the space station boondogle: Science budgets are being raided to cover increased construction costs, and that's still not enough. A few years ago, the space station was supposedly going to be a $10 billion project. In 2000, there was talk about it would hopefully stay within the $30 billion budget. I've now seen it discussed in trade journals, blandly, as a $40 billion dollar project. Meanwhile, everything else but communication satellites have to work with shrinking budgets - and the only reason the communication birds get out of the squeeze is they are funded, lofted, and operated by private enterprise. If that weren't enough, consider what's happening with the military budget: We spend uncounted millions (billions?) on weapons built by secret laboratories, so secret that military commanders aren't even aware of them. Once a conflict arises, they can't be used in the war because the soldiers haven't been trained with them. As if that weren't enough, police departments are buying more radar guns and hiring more "traffic control" officers with the revenues from fines collected from their existing extortion system. There are unattended cameras being installed at intersections to catch motorists who don't wait at traffic lights when no one is around (if there's no one around, why do you have to wait at a traffic light at all?), and reconnaissance airplanes are used (at considerable expense) to catch motorists who do nothing more than pass some of the other traffic on the road. This is supposed to be a country with a government of the people, for the people, and by the people, not one where the people exist only to serve the whims of the government. Return to the top of this page The Most Successful PartyThe 1929 Socialist Party's entire platform is now enacted into law in this country. No other political movement can make that claim. This is a democracy, based on free trade between individuals that have chosen to voluntarily enter into business relationships of their own choosing, right? What's wrong with this picture? Does the minimum wage insure that the lowest people in the employment chain can afford to support themselves? No, it makes it impossible for many of them to get jobs, because no one can afford to hire them. Does welfare help destitute people recover from their poverty? When was the last time a hand-out really helped anyone? Remember the proverb: If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day; if you teach him to fish, you feed him for a lifetime. Welfare is nothing more than liberal politicians buying the votes of indigent people who believe they have no other way of getting out of their poverty. If a child grows up in a household where no one has to work, because the government pays their bills, do you think that child is ever going to think they need to get a job? Probably not, as long as politicians can be convinced they have the money to buy their vo--, er, that is, give them hand outs. How long do you think the Social(ist) (in)Security system is going to hold out? It's a system that was designed with the mortality rates extant in the 1920's. Now people live much longer, which means there are more older people trying to spend the same pie - paid for by the working stiffs who haven't reached retirement age yet. What's going to pay for the rest of the crew when they do get old enough to retire? More taxes? Return to the top of this page There will be more! |
|
