View Single Post
Old July 16, 2010, 12:57 PM   #13
DG45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 904
Thats just the point fiddletown, someone else did the deciding on who was labeled an "enemy of the people"until the Soviet bloc fell, and I didn't like it. The difference was that it was a crime in the Soviet Union to be an "enemy of the people" and I'm not proposing the criminalization of anyone. I'm just suggesting that we should latch onto the concept that there are such people and do the deciding of who is one ourselves, and then let someone else not like it.

Glenn, you're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say "thoughts" were a crime that should be punished, and although the people I was referring to are those who have moved well beyond "thoughts", to "acts", in trying to force their anti-2nd Amendment views on the general public, I didn't say there was anything illegal about that either, nor that it was anything that is or that should be punishible by law, but would you have us not hurt their feelings either?

All I'm suggesting is that we call such people what they are, and IMHO no better term could describe what they are than "enemies of the people" for they are truly enemies of the peoples natural and constitutional rights. Nothing wrong with hanging a tag on them that fits them perfectly as far as I can see.
DG45 is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04982 seconds with 7 queries