People who use "but it''s the LAW" as an excuse.

If the congress passed a law requiring you to deposit all your money into a list of approved banks, would you do it?\ \ If they passed a law requiring all people to get DNA tested and fingerprinted, in case you commit a crime in the future (or committed one in the past that they can track) would you do it?\ \ If they passed a law that women could only have 2 children before mandatory sterilization, would you support it?\ \ If they passed a law requiring you to register all gold and silver jewelry, and all potentially valuable works of art or other possessions (for tax purposes) would you do it?\ \ If they passed a law mandating breathalyzer ignition systems for all cars, would you support it?\ \ If they passed a law requiring you to list your sexual orientation, (or religion, or ethnic/racial heritage) on your drivers license (under penalty of perjury) would you do it?\ \ Think about that the next time someone uses the line "I''m just following the law and what it orders" and recall the Nuremburg trials.

Pissed off liberal
• OP is not a pissed off liberal, OP is a libertarian.

  thanks, troll-dar!

• OK, OP - but none of those things ARE the law. Why don''t you try to list things that ARE the law that you fine intrusive?

• Uhhhh, how about we start with the PATRIOT Act?\ \ Seriously, the list of egregious and ignorant laws would take a year to list, and that''s just at the federal level. \ \ Are you really that ignorant and stupid, R2?

  OP

• Just another libertarian douchebag.%0D\ %0D\ %0D\ %0D\ We have laws for a reason. You want a country with no laws? Move to Somalia, m''kay?

• Guess I pushed a button with the webbie...

• "Seriously, the list of egregious and ignorant laws would take a year to list, and that''s just at the federal level."\ \ Fine, list 5.\ \ And try to be a tad more specific about the Patriot Act, OP. It''s like saying "Hollywood liberals" at a Michelle Bachmann rally. Push the button, fine, but at least explain why.

• I hope R6 gets busted pissing in his lawn and has to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

  http://www.cfcamerica.org/news/news/882-outdoor-urination-brings-lifetime-registration-as-sex-offender

• I would follow the law, even if I didn''t like it. I would try to change, via our representational system of governance, the questionable law. \ \ \ OP, you must be very young because most of us have to endure irritating laws all the time.

• "If they passed a law requiring all people to get DNA tested and fingerprinted, in case you commit a crime in the future (or committed one in the past that they can track) would you do it?"\ \ "If they passed a law mandating breathalyzer ignition systems for all cars, would you support it?"\ \ Since you asked, OP, I would have no problem with either of these two laws.

• R9, suppose they pass the DNA law. The next day they discover a "gay" gene. \ \ 5 years later a totalitarian president issues an executive order that all "gay gene positive" people are to be executed. \ \ Still support it?

• OP is the same poster who was smacked down on the thread titled ''Economic Stupidity''. OP''s friend worked for Gibson Guitars, who got busted for importing illegal wood.\ \ Someone in that thread knew his/her stuff and called OP out.\ \ Thanks, trolldar!

• [quote]If they passed a law mandating breathalyzer ignition systems for all cars, would you support it?%0D\ %0D\ I support that now!

• "The next day they discover a "gay" gene.\ \ 5 years later a totalitarian president issues an executive order that all "gay gene positive" people are to be executed."\ \ That was an awfully busy 5 years.

  Sheesh

• I''d support the 2 kid rule as law. WTF do you need a crap load of kids for anyways?

• Umm OP, every bank is preapproved by government so your point makes no sense.

• [R9], suppose they pass the DNA law. The next day they discover a "gay" gene. 5 years later a totalitarian president issues an executive order that all "gay gene positive" people are to be executed. Still support it?"\ \ That would be wrong because the "executive order" would be wrong, not the DNA testing itself. In the same way that using a breathalyzer test to throw someone in jail because he''s discovered to be drunk while walking down the sidewalk would be wrong, but using a breathalyzer to prevent or punish drunk driving is right.\ \ Get it?

• "If they passed a law that women could only have 2 children before mandatory sterilization, would you support it?"\ \ I would fully support this law! Some people are PIGS about reproduction.

• Come on guys, I know it''s tempting to just argue the OP down, but you can''t deny that this DNA law would be very dangerous and just asking for abuse, and that mandatory sterilization after two children is not nice. \ \ I can''t figure out what''s wrong with the breathalyzer cars.

• OP = the self-identified Ron Paul supporter from the thread about Gibson guitar wood, who ran like a little girl when a commenter with a whole lot more knowledge pointed out how stupid OP was being there.\ \ OP is a libertarian troll.

• And consider that a law mandating DNA collection without cause, or a law limiting reproduction in women, would run into serious Constitutional problems and probably be struck down even by a conservative Supreme Court. \ \ \ \ There are no obvious Constitutional or civil liberties problems with laws limiting the trade in endangered species. If there were, they would have been challenged long before now.\ \ The federal government has a legitimate role in regulating commerce. Period. Or does the OP want shark-fin soup on the menu legally in his favorite Chinese restaurant?

• 1. Having to drive on the right side of the road.\ \ 2. Being forced to use US currency when I go to the store.\ \ 3. Not being able to throw a punch when someone needs it.\ \ 4. Having to clean up my dogs poop.\ \ 5. Not being allowed to key cars that don''t know how to park.

  OP (faux)

• I think I should only obey the laws I feel like obeying. The rest are for little peple who aren''t as smart and as special as I am.

• I think the breathalyzer idea is a good one.\ \ Nobody has a constitutional right to get behind the wheel of 2 tons of moving metal. So if it would cut down on road deaths i think it makes sense. \ \ The only problem is it''s easily overridden by someone else.

• Women should only be allowed to have one child before mandatory sterilization, and two if they''re married or in a stable long-term relationship. (And no she does not have to kill the second one if her husband dies in an accident, so don''t make up dumb scenarios).%0D\ %0D\ And if people are so into parenting, they may adopt any number of children from anywhere who need homes, providing they can provide for their basic needs. %0D\ %0D\ Oh, and all people planning to reproduce or adopt are required to take parenting classes.

• Also: each Duggar spawn = mandatory sterilization. Period.

• Apples must be called oranges!%0D\ %0D\ Cats must mate with dogs!%0D\ %0D\ Everybody must compare gold bricks with blocks of wood and declare them equal!

  OP

• There are a lot of well trained sheeple on this thread.

• [quote]Think about that the next time someone uses the line "I''m just following the law and what it orders" and recall the Nuremburg trials.\ \ Godwin''s Law--LIVE!

• I''m pretty sure Godwin''s war is something about "The longer a discussion goes on the more likely it gets that someone compares the other side to the Nazis". Having a Nazi comparison in an *OP* is therefor not the best example. Plus Nazi comparisons are not wrong by definition. \ \ LOL R24 So the sterilization is mandatory for a woman after birth unless she is currently in a stable long term relationship? Only then she gets the right for another child (whenever, by whomever - it''s not as if you could control that) as an award for not having a kid out of wedlock so far? I see you really thought that one through! Very progressive idea!

• I second R23

• [quote]OP is the same poster who was smacked down on the thread titled ''Economic Stupidity''. OP''s friend worked for Gibson Guitars, who got busted for importing illegal wood.%0D\ %0D\ I suspected as much. I guess he''s trying to save face in this thread with equally silly assertions after being brutalized in the other.%0D\ %0D

• Yes\ Yes\ Yes\ No\ Yes\ No\ No\ No \ Yes

• BIG GOVERNMENT is ruining my life..... except if I need assistance after a hurricane.

  T. Bagger

• Oh please bring back the separate "Politics" forum.

• Everyone hates the troll dar trolls.

• The most egregious example of "but it''s the law" is the way the law protects the profits of Big Pharma by preventing cancer and AIDS patients from cultivating their own marijuana for medicinal purposes. Doctors prescribe dying patients drugs that cost far more than marijuana to replicate the same effects marijuana has on stimulating appetite, and relieving nausea and depression. \ \ The law that lets us buy booze and cigarettes but prevents us from smoking pot for recreational purposes is just as bad. Worse is the way we cannot have hemp products because DuPont and the other manufacturers of synthetics don''t want us to have durable organic goods.

• My complaint is that people defend this or that behavior on the grounds that it''s legal. You might be free to do it, but that doesn''t mean it''s right.

• I don''t disagree entirely, R37, but the converse is also true.

  RancidOldKunst

• [quote] And consider that a law mandating DNA collection without cause, or a law limiting reproduction in women, would run into serious Constitutional problems and probably be struck down even by a conservative Supreme Court. \ \ Yeah, I doubt SCOTUS would strike it down. They seem to like to keep in place all of the laws that compromise our 4th amendment rights.

• I stick to the earth because of gravity. It''s the LAW.

• Nazis loved the law.

• Didn't the Nazi war criminals just use the "I was just following the law" defense?

• Today's reminder that Libertarians are complete fucking idiots is brought to you by "Atlas Shrugged", the Musical. We'd tell you when it opens, but you should find out for yourself, you worthless parasite!

  Cue%20idiot%20Libertarians%20vehemently%20denying%20any%20ties%20to%20Ayn%20Rand

• R43 If you think Ayn Rand is more important than Rothbard, Von Mises or Hoppe ( or even ranks in the top ten) you're the clueless moron.