THE American Form of Government Thread (merged)

k_semler

Yep. If you don't qualify for an NFA tax stamp as an individual, just become incorporated, and state "perimeter security" as the reason why you want the weapon. It will really just be an excersize in law. If PCA is reversed, the police state won't be under the covers any more, because then regular Army could assume domestic law enforcement roles. (DPRK anybody?)
_________________
Here Lies the United States Of America.

July 04, 1776 - June 23 2005

Epitaph: "The Experiment Is Over."

Rest In Peace.

Eminent Domain Was The Murderer.

Shadizar · Heavy Crude Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Posts: 181

I strongly oppose the use of the military in law enforcement activities.
It gives the President far too much power. There is a reason we have safeguards in the law to limit the power of government. I'm not sure if Bush would abuse the power, but there is no guarantee that another administration would not.

I for one don't want to see armed troops on my street corner. I saw it in El Salvador when I was a child, and I don't think its something that anyone wants to see that in the U.S.
Our freedoms are being slowly eroded (Eminent Domain, Patriot Act). It may not be intentional, but its happening. The freedoms we give up today will haunt us for years. Another leader, in a different situation will be able to use these new laws in ways that we don't expect now.

We already have the Dep. of Homeland Security, FEMA, the CDC, the National Guard. We have the infrastructure today to deal with future problems, they just need to be better funded and organized to deal more effectively with natural disasters and epidemics.
I'd rather see the government prepare for possible troubles with real solutions. Using the military for emergencies is a reactionary measure. As I understand it, the military can already be used for logistical support. I say, leave it at that.

History repeats itself. If not now, then in the future. The possibility of that is enough for me to see a great danger in the path before us. I don't believe we're in danger of this extreme now, but why take the chance. Our freedoms are ours only so long as we hold them dear....
"The government will make use of these powers only insofar as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures...The number of cases in which an internal necessity exists for having recourse to such a law is in itself a limited one."
- Adolf Hitler, promise to the Reichstag (Parliament) on the occasion of the imposition of "temporary" dictatorship following the "Reichstag Fire."

rogerhb

Shadizar · Heavy Crude Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Posts: 181

Pops

QUICK, SEMLER, LOOK OUT YOUR PERISOPE!
IT’S THE BLACK HELICOPTER AND THE PILOT IS WEARING A BLUE HELMET!

Get a grip man!
The PCA enables the POTUS to use the army – it PREcludes LOCAL authorities from doing so – have I said this before?
Has anyone shouting here read the PC law?

I know you won’t so here it is:
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
-Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1385

Plus a lot of exceptions.
Here is an article (I know you won’t read) about the law (which I know you won’t read) from Washington U (which I know you won’t read):
http://law.wustl.edu/WULQ/75-2/752-10.html
Since I know you won’t read it, let me copy and paste the first paragraph for you cause your finger is occupied:
In response to the military presence in the Southern States during the Reconstruction Era, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act[1] ("PCA" or the "Act") to prohibit the use of the Army in civilian law enforcement. The Act embodies the traditional American principle of separating civilian and military authority and currently forbids the use of the Army and Air Force to enforce civilian laws.[2] In the last fifteen years, Congress has deliberately eroded this principle by involving the military in drug interdiction at our borders.[3] This erosion will continue unless Congress renews the PCA's principle to preserve the necessary and traditional separation of civilian and military authority.
_________________
Make a plan and work it:

Pops

Should we continue eroding the principle for the sake of each first lady’s favorite program or should we redefine the principle?
_________________
Make a plan and work it:

crapattack · Last edited by crapattack on Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:21 am; edited 1 time in total

I have been giving some thought recently to how the PO crisis may play out politically. As a Canadian I've been watching from the outside an seen what appear to be alarming erosions in the American system and a consolodation of power in the Presidential office. One possibility that occured to me would be for the GOP to seize control of the government in order to ensure that the resource wars continue.

In an atmosphere of increasing public distrust the war agenda may be in jeaopardy and there is a (probably small chance) the administration could be forced to put an early end to Iraq. In this case, if their aim, as Kunstler and others tell us, is to secure the remaining oil resources on earth, especially in competition from the Chinese, they could decide to take "war measures" and postpone an election in light of the immediate and present danger of the "Energy Crisis". Take control of the government indefinitely and pursue their agenda across the entire middle east. I don't know all that much about the American system, and as I've said, it's just a scenario I've been thinking of and it's probably not possible.

I'd like to know if what you folks think of this, plausible? If it's not plausible why do you think it couldn't happen... civil unrest? Impeachment? Internatinal resistance? Is it conceivable that the GOP could use the military to control the populace and retain power because of the "Energy Crisis" and use this crises to keep control of government? Do they need to? Perhaps the government is already effectively controlled so well by the neocons and if Bush looses the next one it won't matter, the agenda is already threading. What is the future of US democracy?
_________________
"Ninety percent of everything is crap."
-Theodore Sturgeon

Stay low and run in a random pattern.

List of Civilian Nuclear Accidents

Heineken · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:35 am Post subject: Re: USA Dictatorship?

I think true democracy in the US ended quite some time ago. The proof may be seen in our hideous Congress.

Specop_007 · Expert Joined: Aug 12, 2004 Posts: 6283

Do you really think theres that much difference between the Democrats and Republicans?
_________________
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble

كا&#

Heineken · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:45 am Post subject: Re: USA Dictatorship?

No, I don't think there is that much of a difference between Democrats and Republicans, spe_cop, although the latter are in general slightly more odious to me.

Seadragon · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:49 am Post subject: Re: USA Dictatorship?

Congress is a cesspool of legalized bribery and influence peddling. The big players with money prevail time after time. The cast of characters may change, but the same game is still played over and over. Bush and his minions have done more to expand the power of the US presidency than any executive since Nixon, to the point that the executive can sucessfully flout the laws of the nation without any penalty whatsoever. (Reserving the right to torture or spy on citizens without warrant, hold them without charges or trial, take your pick). Surely, the right to disregard whatever laws the leader deems necessary is the essence of dictatorship. Unbelievably, none of this is secret; it can be read on the front pages of the national newspapers without protest or comment. The somnolent public has long ago ceased to listen or care, content to indulge in mindless shopping, celebrity-watching, and binge eating. It might be enough to observe that the public has traded civil rights for security, except that this would imply some sort of concious decision, of which it is obviously not capable of rousing itself to make.
_________________
Exporting oil is an act of treason"-- Heitor Manoel Pereira, president of AEPET in Brazil, January 06, 2006
come see me sometime... http://www.sonofchaos.blogspot.com/

JayBee · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:53 am Post subject: Re: USA Dictatorship?

As a European, I've never noticed any difference between the Republicans and Democrats. To me it's like two halves of the UK Conservative party squabbling over an argument. Ireland isn't much different with Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. Any US president is going to protect the dollar, US trade superiority and US interests. There's not much to argue over and not be called a "pinko commie fag subversive" or whatever today's equivalent is.
_________________
The Good Life - http://sustainable-life.co.uk/blog/

dhfenton · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:54 am Post subject: Re: USA Dictatorship?

Ludi · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:55 am Post subject: Re: USA Dictatorship?

What should the public do if it cared? What actions would you recommend each citizen take?
_________________
"...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow." - jboogy