[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Steven Bonnell wants to murder Americans he disagrees with

What the fagots LGBTQ really means

I watched Charlie Kirk get assassinated. This is my experience.

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March (Tommy Robinson)

"Transcript: Mrs. Erika Kirk Delivers Public Address: ‘His Movement Will Go On’"

"Victor Davis Hanson to Newsmax: Kirk Slaying Crosses Rubicon"

Rest In Peace Charlie Kirk

Charlotte train murder: Graphic video captures random fatal stabbing of young Ukrainian refugee

Berlin in July 1945 - Probably the best restored film material you'll watch from that time!

Ok this is Funny

Walking Through 1980s Los Angeles: The City That Reinvented Cool

THE ZOMBIES OF AMERICA

THE OLDEST PHOTOS OF NEW YORK YOU'VE NEVER SEEN

John Rich – Calling Out P. Diddy, TVA Scandal, and Joel Osteen | SRS #232

Capablanca Teaches Us The ONLY Chess Opening You'll Ever Need

"How Bruce Springsteen Fooled America"

How ancient Rome was excavated in Italy in the 1920s. Unique rare videos and photos.

Reagan JOKE On The Homeless

The Deleted Wisdom (1776 Report)

Sicko Transfaggots video

The Englund Gambit Checkmate

20 Minutes Of Black DC Residents Supporting Trump's Federal Takeover!

"Virginia Public Schools Deserve This Reckoning"

"'Pack the Bags, We're Going on a Guilt Trip'—the Secret to the Democrats' Success"

"Washington, D.C., Is a Disgrace"

"Trump Orders New 'Highly Accurate' Census Excluding Illegals"

what a freakin' insane asylum

Sorry, CNN, We're Not Going to Stop Talking About the Russian Collusion Hoax

"No Autopsy Can Restore the Democratic Party’s Viability"

RIP Ozzy

"Trump floats 'restriction' for Commanders if they fail to ditch nickname in favor of Redskins return"

"Virginia Governor’s Race Heats Up As Republican Winsome Sears Does a Hard Reboot of Her Campaign"

"We Hate Communism!!"

"Mamdani and the Democratic Schism"

"The 2nd Impeachment: Trump’s Popularity Still Scares Them to Death"

"President Badass"

"Jasmine Crockett's Train Wreck Interview Was a Disaster"

"How Israel Used Spies, Smuggled Drones and AI to Stun and Hobble Iran"

There hasn’T been ... a single updaTe To This siTe --- since I joined.

"This Is Not What Authoritarianism Looks Like"

America Erupts… ICE Raids Takeover The Streets

AC/DC- Riff Raff + Go Down [VH1 Uncut, July 5, 1996]

Why is Peter Schiff calling Bitcoin a ‘giant cult’ and how does this impact market sentiment?

Esso Your Butt Buddy Horseshit jacks off to that shit

"The Addled Activist Mind"

"Don’t Stop with Harvard"

"Does the Biden Cover-Up Have Two Layers?"

"Pete Rose, 'Shoeless' Joe Reinstated by MLB, Eligible for HOF"

"'Major Breakthrough': Here Are the Details on the China Trade Deal"

Freepers Still Love war


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Who Are The Real Extremists?
Source: Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
URL Source: http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archive ... 6/who-are-the-real-extremists/
Published: Aug 26, 2019
Author: Ron Paul
Post Date: 2019-08-27 06:57:55 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 10187
Comments: 50

The recent mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton have re-ignited efforts to pass “Red Flag” laws, which allow the government to take away a person’s guns without due process, and expanded background checks on those wishing to purchase a gun. Some supporters of these measures acknowledge they would not have prevented the Dayton and El Paso shootings, but they think the government must “do something,“ even if that something only makes it more difficult for average Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

The fact that one of the shooters may have been motivated by anti-immigrant views has led to calls for government surveillance of “right-wing extremists.” There are talks of developing computer programs to search social media and identify those whose extreme views supposedly make them likely to commit violence. There are also calls for legislation giving the government new powers to prevent “domestic terrorism.”

Proposals targeting individuals based on their political beliefs — no matter how noxious they are — are a step toward criminalizing those beliefs. If the government gains new powers to treat those with abhorrent beliefs as potential criminals, it will not be long before those powers are used against anyone who challenges the welfare-warfare status quo.

The current use of “right-wing extremism” as a justification for expanding the surveillance state is the mirror image of the use of “Islamo-fascism” to justify the post 9-11 infringements on civil liberties. That is why it is distressing to see progressives and Muslim advocacy groups pushing for new federal authority to crack down on “domestic terrorism,” just as it was disappointing when so many conservatives who opposed Bill Clinton’s attempt to expand the surveillance state endorsed the exact same proposals when they were included in the PATRIOT Act. It is ironic that progressives are supporting new laws against domestic terrorism while simultaneously protesting FBI targeting of Black Lives Matter activists as domestic terrorists.

This is not to say there are not those with extreme ideologies who threaten our liberty and safety, but they are the Republicans and Democrats located in Washington, DC! The most obvious example of DC-based violent extremism is the war party propagandists who spread falsehoods to build support for regime change wars. By the time their falsehoods have been exposed, it is too late: America is stuck in another no-win quagmire and the war party has moved on to its next target.

Demagogic politicians also fan fear and hatred to protect and expand the welfare state. Right-wing nationalists scapegoat illegal migrants without distinguishing between those who come here to take advantage of the welfare system from those who come here seeking economic opportunity — while left-wing progressives demonize the wealthy without distinguishing between those who made their fortunes in the market serving consumers and those who made their fortunes by manipulating the political process. These extremists use scapegoating and demagoguery to gain power and keep the people from focusing on the real source of their discontent: the welfare-warfare state and the fiat money system that makes it possible.

As the welfare-warfare-fiat money system collapses, we will see increased violence. This will result in an increase in police state power. The only way to avoid this fate is for good people to unite and replace the extremist ideologies of the mainstream of both left and right with the ideas of liberty. A good start would be applying “Red Flag” laws to remove neocons from any influence over US foreign policy!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 34.

#2. To: Deckard (#0)

I read the first sentence where Ron Paul has written that …
The recent mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton have re-ignited efforts to pass “Red Flag” laws, which allow the government to take away a person’s guns without due process …
I thought – WOAH – and would read no further because I don’t understand what Ron Paul was saying or meant tjere.

I therefore ask you, Deckard, since you are a strong supporter of libertarianism and a devoted Ron Paul admirer and one who should understand what Ron Paul was saying – to explain to me what he meant when he said: “[Red flag laws] take away a person’s guns without due process.”

I can’t understand that because it is my belief that the red flag law permits police or the family of individuals to petition a state court for an order yp temporary remove firearms from any person who may present a danger to others or to themselves. A judge must make a determination to issue the temporary removal order based on statements and actions made by the gun owner in question. The gun owner may have legal counsel present at the hearing.

My question therefore to you, Deckard, is twofold:

  • First, what does Ron Paul mean “without due process?”

  • Secondly, is my understanding of the red flag law correctly stated?

Gatlin  posted on  2019-08-27   14:58:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Gatlin (#2) (Edited)

The fact that you are FOR Red Flag Laws when it's the gun grabber politicians (on both sides) who are pushing this bullshit makes me more certain that you are a leftist posing as a conservative.

First, what does Ron Paul mean “without due process?”

New York's New 'Red Flag' Law Illustrates the Due Process Problems Posed by Gun Confiscation Orders

The new law allows a long list of people to seek an "extreme risk protection order" that bars the respondent from possessing firearms.

Potential petitioners include police officers, prosecutors, blood relatives, in-laws, current and former spouses, current and former housemates, current and former girlfriends or boyfriends, people who have produced a child with the respondent, and school administrators or their designees, such as teachers, coaches, and guidance counselors. The "school personnel" covered by the law can even report a former student if he graduated within the previous six months.

So you have a minor argument with your girfriend, she calls the cops - your guns are taken away.

You don't think ex-wives and girlfriends will spitefully use these red flag laws out of vengeance.

Basically you are being punished for "thoughtcrime".

Deckard  posted on  2019-08-28   8:28:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Deckard (#15)

I read the article in your link twice. After finishing, I see where the article tells what “the red flag law in New York will do. I can deduct nothing there that in any way shows it is as Ron Paul – that red flag laws will allow the government to take away a person’s guns without due.

… “without due process” …

I simply can’t understand why he is saying this because the red flag laws permit police or the family of individuals to petition a state court for an order to temporary remove firearms from any person who may present a danger to others or to themselves. A judge must make a determination to issue the temporary removal order based on statements and actions made by the gun owner in question. The gun owner may have legal counsel present at the hearing.

And if that, you misguided libertarian asshole, is not DUE PROCESS – then you will need to explain to me why.

Can you?

Salute,
Gatlin

Gatlin  posted on  2019-08-28   9:11:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: All (#16)

To: Deckard

I read the article in your link twice. After finishing, I see where the article tells what “the red flag law in New York will do. I can deduct nothing there that in any way shows it is as Ron Paul – that red flag laws will allow the government to take away a person’s guns without due.

… “without due process” …

I simply can’t understand why he is saying this because the red flag laws permit police or the family of individuals to petition a state court for an order to temporary remove firearms from any person who may present a danger to others or to themselves. A judge must make a determination to issue the temporary removal order based on statements and actions made by the gun owner in question. The gun owner may have legal counsel present at the hearing.

And if that, you misguided libertarian asshole, is not DUE PROCESS – then you will need to explain to me why.

Can you?

I am still waiting for you to explain to me why ...

Gatlin  posted on  2019-08-28   15:47:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 34.

        There are no replies to Comment # 34.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 34.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com