Ron Paul: True Liberty vs. Perfect Safety

In Ron Pauls weekly Texas Straight Talk address, he talks about the increase in law enforcement around the country and how people have been conditioned by mainstream media to view the state as our protector. He brings up how individuals are responsible for their own safety, and our second amendment right to bear arms may ultimately be what determines whether your family lives or dies depending on the situation.

He brings up how the Norway bomber has made people uneasy, but explains that our government ramping up laws and adding more and more police officers to the streets will not stop these things from happening. He talks about how is up to American citizens to protect themselves, because in many situations law enforcement won't be there to protect you.

He talks about how whenever something big like a terrorist attack happens, especially events that get lots of MSM coverage, the people demand that the government step in and do something, however this ultimately leads to more laws, more debt, and a loss of our liberties.

Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras and metal detectors? Do we want to imprison every disturbed or alienated individual who fantasizes about violence? Do we really believe government can provide total security? Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security?

Source

Benjamin Franklin would agree wholeheartedly: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin was also a member of the Hellfire clubs of Europe. The guy had some good things going, but to over use that quote to annoint Ron Paul as super liberty man, is akin to just using a jingle for Mr. Clean.

If he really felt that strongly about our waning liberties why doesn't he just keep talking until he has to be dragged out by his heels from the halls of everyone sucks but Ron Paul. That would make his argument for "liberty" have a little credence.

reply to post by the owlbear

Benjamin Franklin was also a member of the Hellfire clubs of Europe. The guy had some good things going, but to over use that quote to annoint Ron Paul as super liberty man, is akin to just using a jingle for Mr. Clean.

I don't understand, what are the Hellfire Clubs? I think using a quote from a Founding Father about giving up freedom for security is completely relevant to a politician talking about giving up liberty for security. Just because Ben Franklin was a part of some sketchy club doesn't change that quote, so I really don't see your point here.

If he really felt that strongly about our waning liberties why doesn't he just keep talking until he has to be dragged out by his heels from the halls of everyone sucks but Ron Paul. That would make his argument for "liberty" have a little credence.

Where have you been lately? Can you find me a Ron Paul interview where he doesn't talk about liberty and our Constitutional rights?

Everybody could use a refreshing daily dose of Ron Paul. I had mine.

reply to post by kimish

Everybody could use a refreshing daily dose of Ron Paul. I had mine.

I can't get enough of Ron Paul! Everything he says is so true, yet most of it isn't even talked about.

I can't wait to see him kick ass in the upcoming debates, there's nothing better than hearing the crowd go wild after he talks and makes the other candidates look like fools with his words of wisdom.

reply to post by TupacShakur


Amen to that! I love this guy. He is great. As someone stated in another one of the thousand Dr. Paul threads, "he has a refreshing logic". That is soo very true.

At the same time it is kind of scary. It is said that the anti-christ will be liked by many and preform miracles (fix the Country?). Just sayin I'm not trying to get the anti-christ bandwagon going, the thought just popped into my head.

That man has my backing all the way.