Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Fla_Democrat

(2,622 posts)
35. Yes, serious debate
Sun Jan 27, 2013, 07:52 PM
Jan 2013

It was pointed out that we have very loose border restrictions between states, and a certain amount of travel freedom. So, again, how does one stop any, banned item from moving from one state to another, in light of the fact that the mover already knows they are breaking the law?

Some may think the best way is to set check points, (which I suggested), on avenues into the restricted areas. Others, seem (to me at least), want to expand the most restrictive policies from the most restrictive location out to the other states. Then what? Instead of people trafficking guns into NY, they are trafficking into the USSA?

Why not just come down on the people breaking the law, with the fury of a fiery mountain landing on them, instead of dreaming of ways to lock this country down more. On a board that a good size group (knowing the members change, some overlap, ya pick up a few, ya loose a few) wants no boarders, are firmly convinced the police are not just incompetent, but deliberately evil, wants unrestricted access to.. the internet, higher education, housing, health care, food, water, utilities, transportation.. am I missing anything? Anyway, on that board, we have people clamoring to become a police state.

We (collectively) don't trust the federal government to oversee our food, our courts, very little of our 'national defense', it's all a racket. We don't (see preceding sentence) trust the government when it comes to wire taps, surveillance, interrogations, prosecutions or incarcerations. We (above) don't trust elections, legislation, court proceedings, yet some how, if we all just gave up, agreed, if we put our trust in these benevolent law makers, it will be sunshine, and puppies, and people will die at the ripe old age of 250, in their sleep. (Bonus for anyone thinking of how Tyrion Lannister said he wanted to die).

It's not about fighting the gubmit. It's not about 'my precious', or delicate flowers, or any other insult dreamed up. It's not even about deer hunting, or why do you need, or even compensating for a small pecker. It's about consistency.

There was a picture posted earlier, in another thread, showing the 11 Steps to Fascism. Every one of those steps have been covered on this board since I joined many years ago. Each one brings emotions, strong opinions, and core beliefs into play during the discussions. The only problem I see, is that the first 10 generate outrage against, and the last generates desire for.

I know it is an emotional issue. I understand that people are scared and concerned. (well, I'm not, then again, I am a delicate flower, not a scared rabbit ) But, when I hear something must be done, I just think of the Patriot act.




Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

correct Duckhunter935 Jan 2013 #1
Existing laws aren't effective, apparently Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #3
The laws are Federal sarisataka Jan 2013 #8
I'm referring primarily to weak state laws Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #10
Truth is not true sarisataka Jan 2013 #12
In that case, those convicted should not be voting members of that org Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #15
To me sarisataka Jan 2013 #18
So, what - in your estimation - IS the true agenda of this billionaire-founded organization? Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #23
Same as the NRA sarisataka Jan 2013 #25
well then that is a state issue Duckhunter935 Jan 2013 #16
Yes, and those weak state laws are the problem Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #20
Felons ??....your list below has Class C misdemeanors for one.... pkdu Jan 2013 #31
I did not say they are all felons yet sarisataka Jan 2013 #34
we should tear up Interstate 95 right out of the ground datasuspect Jan 2013 #2
Let's not get hasty Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #6
Why not back up even farther and take a good, hard look at the weapons manufactures themselves. RC Jan 2013 #4
There should be a crack down on arms trafficking. hack89 Jan 2013 #5
So..... random stops on I-95? Fla_Democrat Jan 2013 #7
Starting with federal laws Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #9
So, to shut down the 'iron pipeline' Fla_Democrat Jan 2013 #13
Nice attempt to put words in my mouth Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #17
ok, i asked, and got what I read above, so, tell me.... Fla_Democrat Jan 2013 #21
I consider holding dealers accountable to be a good start Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #24
FFL dealers? Fla_Democrat Jan 2013 #27
Google Tiahrt amendments....then think about your first paragraph ... pkdu Jan 2013 #32
Will read more, but the FoP seemed to like it. Fla_Democrat Jan 2013 #36
Actually state police already do this when they got intelligence nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #11
Then it wouldn't be random Fla_Democrat Jan 2013 #14
It appears that you are missing the point. jazzimov Jan 2013 #19
Yup nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #26
No, I get the point Fla_Democrat Jan 2013 #29
OK, now I am officially confused. jazzimov Jan 2013 #30
Yes, serious debate Fla_Democrat Jan 2013 #35
Some excellent points! jazzimov Jan 2013 #38
Since the transportation of guns across state laws Lurks Often Jan 2013 #37
Which means the laws are ineffective, because they are impossible to enforce. jazzimov Jan 2013 #39
"Impossible to enforce" Lurks Often Jan 2013 #40
The same way we've stopped pot and cocaine from being smuggled on 95 Recursion Jan 2013 #28
Well they do still try by stopping every car with black males in them on 95 that they can stultusporcos Jan 2013 #33
It sounds like NY criminals are the root of the problem. aikoaiko Jan 2013 #22
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Strike at the root of gun...»Reply #35