Now government will demand proof you're not a terrorist when buying a car

My God...I don't what angers/saddens me more, the ridiculous government's absolutely draconian measurements under the absolutely blatant lie that it is for safety and security or all the people who are baying like good little sheep that this kind of thing is ok!

Jesus so many hopelessly brainwashed. You people that think this crap is about safety do realize that you are more likely to win the lottery, be killed by a cop, or even be hit by lightning than to ever even see a terrorist right!?

As a matter of fact I did a thread not too long ago that mathmatically showed all the ridiculous things that are more likely to happen to you in your life than ever seeing a terrorist, Including the things I mentioned!

So why aren't people begging the government to stop cops!? Or to stop lightning? Or car accidents? Don't be freakin idiots. This is about control and oppression and nothing else.

"I don't even have to think deeply of course its o.k??????????????????"
please good sir( I'm being as polite as I can be ) think deeply before o.kaying anything your friendly govt wants to do To you....
there are 100's of thousands of federal laws on the books every one even the most squeaky clean of us is guilty of something.
I believe you ( /we all could use a paradigm changer) Please watch this discussion from a law school class about talking to the police; its an eye opener.

( it was for me and I actually carried an investigative badge for half my military career: 2parts:
part1

part2:

reply to post by 46ACE


These are two of the most informative videos i have found on the net. I posted them a few years back on several sights and got great feedback on the points they lay out for you as reasons to beware of your own innocence when dealing with authorities. People do not realize that we are all considered fodder for the enforcement and the furthering of Gov thugs with badges to further their careers. Not 'To Protect and Serve' the public!
Those vids along with this link:

No Duty to Protect!

should give people pause who think they have nothing to hide when dealing with authorities!

Zindo

reply to post by Redwookieaz

My God...I don't what angers/saddens me more, the ridiculous government's absolutely draconian measurements under the absolutely blatant lie that it is for safety and security or all the people who are baying like good little sheep that this kind of thing is ok!...

I think it is all about "boiling the frog" getting us use to more and more intrusion into our lives slowly.

First we had to wear seat belts "for our safety"
Then it was smoking was banned "for our safety"
Then it was pee in a bottle or you can not have a job. "for our safety of course"
Now it is being groped by a complete stranger .

Meanwhile inch by inch the independent jobs an ordinary citizen can do have been attacked.

Domestic help - Tax law wiped that out except for the rich with accountants
Baby sitting - a trumped up media scare not only spawn the law to kill that as a source of independent income but innocent people DIED in jail (MA) while the lawyers involved made it big in politics.
Independent Consultant - nope tax laws killed that option. Now in the USA, Walmart (1,800,000 ) Kelly Temp Services (750,000 ) and McDonald's (465,000) are the top three employers after the federal government (2 million) Source

The last unregulated industry is farming and that is under attack and should be dead shortly.

I can not think of ANY other unregulated job options left other than farming. When you have government regulations then the government has the whip hand because if you are not a good little sheeple you lose your license, get fined, get jail time... all without ever ever seeing a trial by jury in many cases.

The trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State, where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.” -- Constitution for the United States of America, Article III, Section 2, Paragraph [3] www.halexandria.org...

But some how, being guilty of breaking a regulation is not considered a "crime"

Direct copy from the bill HR 875

Civil Penalty
(A) IN GENERAL- Any person that commits an act that violates the food safety law (including a regulation promulgated or order issued under the food safety law) may be assessed a civil penalty by the Administrator of not more than $1,000,000 for each such

B) SEPARATE OFFENSE- Each act described in subparagraph (A) and each day during which that act continues shall be considered a separate offense.

Criminal Sanctions-
(1) OFFENSE RESULTING IN SERIOUS ILLNESS- Notwithstanding section 303(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(a)), if a violation of any provision of section 301 of such Act (21 U.S.C. 301) with respect to an adulterated or misbranded food results in serious illness, the person committing the violation shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or both.

(2) OFFENSE RESULTING IN DEATH- Notwithstanding section 303(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(a)), if a violation of any provision of section 301 of such Act (21 U.S.C. 331) with respect to an adulterated or misbranded food results in death, the person committing the violation shall be imprisoned for not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or both.

(e) Penalties Paid Into Account- The Administrator--
(1) shall deposit penalties collected under this section in an account in the Treasury; and
(2) may use the funds in the account, without further appropriation or fiscal year limitation--
(A) to carry out enforcement activities under the food safety law; or
(B) to provide assistance to States to inspect retail commercial food establishments or other food or firms under the jurisdiction of State food safety programs.

Did you see where a person had the right to trial any where in that mess? I wonder if this will apply?

Amendment 7 - Trial by Jury in Civil Cases. Ratified 12/15/1791. In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. www.usconstitution.net...

And just for those who were not aware of it.

notice the fundamentally important point:

Jury Nullification has the effect on nullifying any bad laws, laws passed illegally, unnecessary laws, laws inappropriately applied, or laws which are unjust for any reason. Jury Nullification is about seeking justice, not adhering to the letter of the law.

“I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.” -- Thomas Jefferson

Jefferson’s viewpoint is that jury trials can serve to nullify the laws a government attempts to impose upon the citizenry, and specifically, those laws which violate the principles of the constitution from which the government derives its authority.

Lysander Spooner has written that “in criminal cases, it is not only the right and duty of juries to judge what are the facts, what is the law, and what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or resisting the execution of laws.” [3]
www.halexandria.org...