A Judge Handcuffs The Cops

2 Shares
117949246

There can be no doubt that the stop-and-frisk actions of New York City’s police department have been hugely successful in lowering the crime rate there.

So, of course, they’ve been under attack by liberal do-gooders. Sadly, this past Monday, a Federal judge ruled that they violated the Constitutional rights of minorities. Is anyone surprised?

Stop and frisk has been an important weapon for police departments everywhere in their efforts to deter crime. Mayor Michael Bloomberg defended the program in New York City, saying:

The NYPD’s ability to stop and question suspects that officers have reason to believe have committed crimes, or are about to commit crimes, is the kind of policing that courts across the nation have found, for decades, to be constitutionally valid.

If this decision were to stand, it would turn those precedents on their head — and make our city, and in fact the whole country, a more dangerous place.

Thanks in large part to the stop-and-frisk program, Bloomberg says that New York is the safest big city in the United States. Unlike Chicago and other cities where crime rates are skyrocketing, New York is seeing record lows in many areas of violent crime.

You won’t be surprised to learn that most of the violent crime in the city is committed by blacks and Hispanics against other blacks and Hispanics. Or that most of the people stopped and questioned by police are also members of these two minorities.

So it follows, as night follows day, that the stop-and-frisk program was challenged in the courts. U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled in a pair of decisions that the police department’s policy violated the Constitutional rights of minorities.

It just so happens that blacks and Hispanics make up about 60 percent of the population in the precinct under dispute in the case. But they made up 96 percent of the people the police stopped and questioned. This was enough to convince Scheindlin that the police department’s actions were racist and unConstitutional.

The judge ignored the fact that an overwhelming majority of crimes committed in the area are by minorities against minorities. In New York’s 88th Precinct, where the alleged discrimination took place, 99 percent of violent crimes (and 93 percent of all reported crimes) were committed by blacks and Hispanics.

Or as former New York Governor George Pataki put it, “You go where the crime is if you want to stop the crime.” And he added, “The effect of the policy is thousands of lives that are saved, largely low-income, minority lives, because we have much lower rates of violent crime.”

Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute pointed out the absurdity of the judge’s logic:

[T]hough whites and Asians commit less than 1 percent of violent crime in the 88th Precinct and less than 6 percent of all crime, according to Scheindlin 40 percent of all stops should be of whites and Asians, to match their representation in the local population.

That would be as ridiculous as having airport screeners pick on grandmothers and young children, just to show they’re not “profiling.” Oh, wait; that happens all the time.

Columnist Gary Bauer points out how stop and frisk benefits minorities in New York:

The irony is that the vast majority of people whose lives are saved by stop-question-and-frisk are minorities, the vast majority of the police officers who employ it on their patrols are minorities and the vast majority of residents who are safer because of the policy are minorities.

But, of course, liberals on a crusade — especially one that will hamstring and handcuff the police — will simply ignore any facts that get in their way.

To realize how absurd some of the arguments can be, consider the case involving David Floyd, the primary plaintiff in Floyd v. City of New York, the class-action lawsuit brought before Scheindlin. Here’s how The Wall Street Journal described what happened with him:

[Floyd] was observed trying numerous keys and jostling a door in an area where a series of burglaries had recently been reported. Because burglary is often a violent crime, the judge thought the cops were justified in stopping and frisking the men’s’ outer garments but went too far in checking Mr. Floyd’s pockets. Therefore the judge ruled that his Fourth Amendment rights had been violated.

Can you believe what you just read? According to Scheindlin, the police were justified in searching Floyd’s jacket. But how dare they see what he had in his pants’ pocket!

Here’s how The Journal describes a second of Judge Scheindlin’s examples:

Then there’s Clive Lino, stopped and frisked in 2011 because he matched the description of a homicide suspect from a wanted poster distributed to officers that morning – right down to his red leather Pelle Pelle jacket.

Sounds like good police work, doesn’t it? Not good enough, the judge ruled: “Here again the judge saw a reasonable stop and even a reasonable frisk, but a frisk that went too far and created another alleged Fourth Amendment violation.”

In her ruling, Scheindlin said that the New York Police Department conducted 4.4 million stops from January 2004 through June 2012. Yet the class-action lawsuit brought before her cited only 19 cases. You would think that if you could cherry-pick just 19 examples out of a total of 4.4 million cases, all of them would be horrifying examples of police misconduct.

That isn’t what happened. The judge said that in five cases, such as the two cited above, the stops were reasonable but the frisks went too far. In another five cases, neither the stops nor the frisks were unreasonable.

That left only nine cases — fewer than half — wherein she concluded that both the stops and the frisks were not based on reasonable suspicion and thus were unConstitutional.

Scheindlin ordered that new procedures be enacted by the police to end the discrimination and that a Federal monitor be appointed to make sure her instructions are carried out.

Bloomberg promptly announced that the City will appeal Scheindlin’s decision. Hopefully, the U.S. Court of Appeals — and, if necessary, the U.S. Supreme Court — will overturn her ruling.

What if that doesn’t happen? The Wall Street Journal put it this way:

The tragedy is that if the judge’s ruling isn’t overturned, the victims won’t be in the tony precincts of liberal New York. They will be in the barrios and housing projects where stop-and-frisk has helped to protect the most vulnerable citizens, who are usually minorities.

Once again, liberal policies hurt the most the very people they claim to want to help. So what else is new?

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

–Chip Wood

Chip Wood

is the geopolitical editor of PersonalLiberty.com. He is the founder of Soundview Publications, in Atlanta, where he was also the host of an award-winning radio talk show for many years. He was the publisher of several bestselling books, including Crisis Investing by Doug Casey, None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham and The War on Gold by Anthony Sutton. Chip is well known on the investment conference circuit where he has served as Master of Ceremonies for FreedomFest, The New Orleans Investment Conference, Sovereign Society, and The Atlanta Investment Conference.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • Alex

    Not all White people are Family Exterminators or Child Abduction Rape/Torture Murderers.
    The vast majority of people committing these horrors ARE White, however, so lets stop and frisk all of us White people for the misdeeds of a few. Are children will be much safer.

    • Alex

      *Sorry, last line should read, “Our children…”

      • RevNowWhileWeCan

        There’s an “edit” option bro…….. :)

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          I don’t think Bob allows that for walk-on commenters.

          • KG

            Bob wants to keep track of the people here……ooops, sorry Bob. Any NSA agents around here??

        • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

          He is posting as a “guess”. And for the “guess” posters there is no “EDIT” option.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Isn’t it odd that most of the Liberal Progressive posters are posting as “Guest”?
            Alex, NC, Dave.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Do you still surprised by “the Liberal Progressive posters ” actions?

            If you do, than you “surprise” me.

            For example Karolyn posts as “Guest” under the name “NotLikeYou”. But it just in her replies to me.

  • akfellow

    All citizens must be required to strip naked at the order of any local, state or federal government agent. Non-compliance must result in forced cavity searches. If you are innocent, then you have nothing to hide.

    • jimmie smith

      Yea..If your strip searched…you damn sure got nothing to hide…just you and your monkey.

    • dan

      …well, I might go for some exhibitionism if cops were required to be stipped and probed and drug tested before every shift…
      after all ,we’re all equal under thel law,aren’t we….
      of course I don’t think anyone is ready for a naked Congress-critter

  • u_bill

    Forget about the racism, stopping and frisking anyone at random without cause is BS. Bloomberg violates and imposes his will on the peasants while he remains protected by an impenetrable security bubble.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Considering that NYC is not a bastion of Conservatism or Libertarianism, any and all laws have been put in place by Dems/Progs/Leftists,so now the Dems/Progs/Leftists don’t like their own laws. The Leftists have gone against the precepts of the Constitution for so long what are they crying foul about. I am willing to say that they got what they deserved.

  • vicki

    The op writes:

    “So, of course, they’ve been under attack by liberal do-gooders.
    Sadly, this past Monday, a Federal judge ruled that they violated the
    Constitutional rights of minorities. Is anyone surprised?
    Stop and frisk has been an important weapon for police departments everywhere in their efforts to deter crime.”

    So we can infer that you support NSA spying on everyone without warrants as well? I am disappointed in your position Chip. Either you defend everyone’s rights or you defend none.

    • RevNowWhileWeCan

      I’m a little surprised at Chip’s response also. Just when you think someone is for “personal liberty”. :D

  • Sematary

    I couldn’t even finish this entire piece. How are you writing under “Personal Liberty Digest”? I wouldn’t care if they evened it all out, so to speak, and stopped 60% minorities and 40% whites – which is a misnomer, since you can’t be in the minority if you are in the majority – It is STILL unconstitutional no matter how you cut it. The cops can’t simply stop you and search you for no reason. It IS unconstitutional and people who can defend that type of action are as un-American and traitorous to their nation as John McCain, Barack Obama and the rest of the treasonous scum that developed such things as imprisoning people without trial and “free speech zones”. You all make me sick.

    • GQ4U

      Wow!!! Next time don’t hold back. Nice one two punch.

      • Sematary

        Believe it or not, I was holding back. And…. He posted this under “conservative” politics? What is conservative about shredding the constitution?

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Unfortunately, the Progressives have succeeded in dumbing people down to the point where NeoConservative Progressives are considered to be “conservative”.

        • GQ4U

          Not a damn thing.

  • Sematary

    Hey, here’s a clue for you, Chip. If you REALLY want to prevent much of the crime in the big cities – end the so called “war on drugs”..

  • KG

    I guess Chip is you typical conservative White male who feels its his ‘burden’ to correct the ‘lesser’ people. And, as a typical Right winger, he is not interested in the details, but the emotional impact (and ‘they’ like to call Liberals ‘emotional’). As well as the prospect of destroying the parts of the Constitution he doesn’t like. I know you mentioned 4th amendment rights, but what about their 14th amendment rights to equal protection under the law? Just like Judge Roy Bean, Chip takes that part and rips it out then says “I just repeal that law!” And all of you Tea Bagger idiots lap it up like kitties to a bowl of milk. How ‘sick’ is that?????

    • GQ4U

      I am TEA Party advocate but Chip is wrong on this one. Constitutional law should never be set aside for any reason by anyone. Lincoln set the precedent and precedent begets precedent and after awhile your rights have been precedented into obscurity.

      By the way Tea Bagging is supposedly big among the gays and calling TEA Party followers Tea Baggers may offend your primarily left leaning gay friends — just a heads up there KG, I’m not getting all emotional about it… really.

      • KG

        You extensive knowledge of this subject seems to belie your own proclivities to a love that dare not speak it’s name. Tell us all how you enjoy what David called love –

        I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me. Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women.
        — 2 Samuel 1:26

        • FreedomFighter

          I believe you are confusing “love” with “gay sex”. Not the same Dipstick.
          Laus Deo
          Semper FI

          • Average_Joe56

            It might be…for KG (Knave Goober)

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            He is reading Queen James “bible”
            http://queenjamesbible.com/

          • KG

            If you take out any king james bible,as well as any Jewish Talmudic text, you will see that verse. Don’t you guys believe in the inerrant word? Or do you pick and choose what you want to believe? Cafeteria style Christianity – Be your own savior, eh?

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            “You SHALL NOT lie with a male AS WITH a woman; IT IS AN ABOMINATION … But YOU SHALL KEEP MY STATUTES AND MY RULES AND DO NONE OF THESE ABOMINATIONS, either the native or the stranger, who sojourns among you…So keep My charge NEVER TO PRACTICE ANY OF THESE ABOMINABLE CUSTOMS, that were practiced before you, and NEVER to make yourselves unclean by them: I am the LORD your GOD.” (Leviticus 18:22-30)

            “The look on THEIR FACES TESTIFIES AGAINST THEM, and THEY PARADE THEIR SIN like SODOM; THEY DO NOT HIDE IT. Woe to their soul! THEY HAVE BROUGHT DISASTER UPON THEMSELVES.” (Isaiah 3:9)

            “For even their WOMEN DID CHANGE THE NATURAL USE into that which is AGAINST THE NATURE; and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, BURNED IN THEIR LUST ONE TOWARD ANOTHER; MEN COMMITTING SHAMELESS ACTS WITH MEN and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.” (Rom.1:26, 27)

            “Those who are dominated by the flash think about
            sinful things, but those who are controlled by the Holy Spirit think about things that please the Spirit. IF YOUR FLESH DOMINATES YOUR MIND, THERE IS DEATH. But if the Holy Spirit controls your mind, there is life and peace. For THE MIND THAT IS SET ON THE FLESH IS HOSTILE to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed it cannot be. Those, who are in the flesh cannot please God.”
            (Rom.8:5-6)

            Enough said.

          • KG

            Matthew 6:5

            King James Version (KJV)

            5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            As ALWAYS you are using CONTEXTOMY

            What is your point in your babble?
            1) It’s totally IRRELEVANT to my comment.
            2) I do NOT pray “in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets”.

            When I pray, I go into MY room, shut the door and pray to MY Heavenly Father. And when I pray, I do not use VAIN REPETITIONS as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words. (Matthew 6:6-7)

            EACH time you just making FOOL of yourself.

          • KG

            So Johnathan (a Man) gave David (a Man) “love” that was ‘more wonderful than that of women.” What is ‘making love’ with a Woman? And the ‘love’ was more wonderful.

            I guess you think you are better than your Gay brothers and sisters. Just tell me one sin that Christ did NOT die for?

          • Karolyn

            Love is love and sex is sex. There is a difference, or did you not know that? Gays and lesbians do love their partners just like anybody else.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Oh, Lesbian is preaching PERVERSION and DEPRAVITY!!!

          • Karolyn

            Ad hominem. (in her view) Not that there is anything wrong with being a lesbian.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Ad hominem in your PERVERT view.
            In MY view and any normal self-respected person it’s DEBASED mind and DEGENERATED & DECADENT behavior.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            You are predator.

          • Karolyn

            I”M the predator? Thanks for the laugh. I’m not the one who calls everybody names.

          • Karolyn

            I”M the predator? Thanks for the laugh. I’m not the one who calls everybody names.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Unfortunately, after a lifetime of Public School Indoctrination, the concept of Freedom has been greatly diminished.
            To relearn that concept:
            http://library.mises.org/books/Murray%20N%20Rothbard/For%20a%20New%20Liberty%20The%20Libertarian%20Manifesto.pdf

            By the way, Karolyn, didn’t you say that you are retired now? If so, what’s keeping you from reading some books and learning something?

          • Karolyn

            Besides finishing up school, I do read, Dave.

    • FreedomFighter

      KG you really do serve a purpose on this board, please continue posting. Like that pole you slide into a sewage storage tank to measure the level of how full of excrement it is, you serve as a dipstick to the progressive liberal mind.
      KG the dipstick to progressive liberal mind.
      Laus DeoSemper FI

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      What is a right-winger to you, KGB?

  • $7151201

    Wow Chip. Please tell me that this was some parody writing practice.

  • GiveMeLiberty,OrGiveMeDeath

    Chip, Have you lost your ever loving MIND? Seriously you claim to be conservative, and you think stop in frisk is ok????? What the Heck, Dude that is just wrong.

    Attention all readers, Poor Chip has fallen down and can’t get up, bumped his head just before writing this stupid article. So please forgive him his drooling stupidity on this article.

    • jdn

      He has bought into Obamas anything is OK if it saves one life scam .

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      LOL.

  • GQ4U

    An anti-liberty article in Personal Liberty Digest. Am I on Candid Camera?

    • Average_Joe56

      The first thing that I did after I read the article….checked my calendar to make sure it wasn’t April Fool’s Day…Imagine my surprise….when it wasn’t…..

  • the gul

    I applaud the judge. The police are out of control. There is no such thing as a good cop, because cop A will never turn in cop B. Remember the statement ” First they came for the communists,

    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

    Then they came for the socialists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

    Then they came for me,
    and there was no one left to speak for me.

    Stand up for the Constitution. Today we found out that the NSA abused their power thousand of times a year. We are no longer a free country

  • GQ4U

    I lost the part of the Constitution with minority rights. Will someone post it?

    • TheOriginalDaveH
    • vicki

      In the Constitution there is a term of art. “The People”. It us used often in reference to our God given rights. It is referring to the people both individually and collectively. Thus the part of the Constitution that talks about minority rights is the part that talks about rights.

      It is also worth noting that the Constitution is a set of LIMITS on government and not a grant of rights to the people.

      • GQ4U

        Your are right but it’s not based on a minority class. The individual in America became a Sovereign and no one lords it over a Queen or King and our collective agreement or Sovereign pact is the U.S. Constitution. Its an inviolable treaty that constitutes an act of war should one party tread on the other. That part of the Constitution that talks about rights is defining those rights and describes the minority as the Federal Government. The Bill of Rights is an expression of the individuals supreme position in governing his own affairs while reducing government intrusion. There are 9-rights set aside for the people and one for the States. There are non set aside because of your skin color or ethnicity or religion. All rights are for all citizens and any violation or invasion of one parties rights threatens us all. A judicial decision that mentions a sub-class of the citizenry is substantively wrong on it face.

        Okay — I’m off my soap box. Thanks for your comment vicki. bye

        • vicki

          So you said the same thing as I did. Ok. But I would like to point out that states do NOT have any rights. Only people, individually and collectivly, have rights. Those rights are inherent in us and given to us by our Creator.

          If you look carefully at the text of the 9th amendment it clearly points out that people have MANY rights. Too many to enumerate in the Constitution.

          If you look carefully at the text of the 10th amendment it clearly points out that states have powers. And ONLY powers. It further clarifies the fact that people have powers.

          People have rights and powers. We, The people have chosen to delegate SOME of our powers to the Federal Government and some to the states. Some of the powers we delegated exclusively to the federal government, hence Amendment 10. Some of the powers we explicitly forbade government, federal and state. Hence the Bill of Rights.

          Oddly the 1st amendment was a limitation on the Federal government only (Congress shall make no law….) but since most states had an equivalent limit in their constitutions there didn’t appear to be a need.

  • ArkansasGirl

    Did Chip drink the Kool-Aid of the Liberal side of town?

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      That’s the NeoConservative Progressive side of town.

  • FreedomFighter

    Stop and Frisk — preparing the sheep for full spectrum domination. Its all part of the conditioning to the police state…for your safety of course. Ever watch one of those old WWII movies where the GESTOPO grabs people for no reason and shakes them down and maybe kills a few?–Looks exactly like stop and Frisk.
    The Banksters NEED A WAR (see Albert Pike writings for WWIII), the board is set, the pieces are moving, the game is being played as we speak here. Get long term food, ammo, meds, gold, silver, get your money out of paper, and get the frak out of cities. Most of all — Get right with God.
    Underground Rumors: Possible Stocks meltdown within 60 days. Global entities dumping dollars, buying hard goods. Military assets being activated globally. DHS buying huge amounts long term storage foods.
    Laus DeoSemper FI

  • john

    This site talks a lot about liberty but when it comes to minorities, for some reason its a different story. 4.4 million stops by the nypd, that’s half of the population of new york city. something is drastically wrong with this picture. stop and frisk without probable cause, constitutes a direct threat to one’s liberty, one of the mantra’s of this site.

    • Sematary

      Fairly certain that the views of this particular totalitarian are not the views of the website

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      The concept of “probable cause” has been greatly abused.

    • ISHKABIBEL

      But, the minorities are committing the vast majority of the crimes in NYC, and over 90% of them on their fellow minorities…so that is where the cops go to stop & frisk….Not hard to understand is it? Not racist at all….Is is wrong to do it the way they’re are doing it ? YES, I do believe it is out of control, but not motivated by race, but by gang violence…but to go Park Ave. or the suburbs of Queens & do it makes no sense…Capish?

  • ThomasThePaine

    Like I always said: Neocons are just as bad as Neocoms. . . They only respect the parts of the constitution that they like. The ones they don’t like; well the Founding Fathers didn’t really know things would be today; or some similar garbage. Just like the liberals.

    I am white and I don’t like most blacks. . . However, a man has the right to go
    about his business without being bothered by cops. In fact, If I am not suspected of a crime, I don’t even have to talk to them.

    To the idiots that will bring up Terry v. Ohio (thet includes you, Chip), do I have to remind you what John Roberts did with Obozoscare? The simple truth is that most of the time, they will rule for the government and against the Constitution

    Just because a scumbag political hack in a black robe says that some is constitutional, it does not make it so! Just wait until the TSA sets up shop on street corners with their gloves and vaseline.

    RepugnocRATS. . . The name of the fake two party system!

  • hotdiggitydog

    Hey Chip, you might want to send your resume over to the Huffington Post because your point of view is better suited to their readers than to Personal Liberty Digest readers.
    Every one makes mistakes and I will forgive you this transgression, but if I continue to see these kinds of viewpoints on PLD I’m outta here. I will unsubscribe.

  • nc

    COLT, they have “stop and frisk” in Red States! They call it “Bubba copping a feel”.

    • equestrian_colt

      LOL however good thing it isn’t here yet cause I’d break any part of a pig that touches me and then I’d be going after the Nazi who started it.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      You are such an ignorant Zealot, NutCase. This isn’t a red state blue state thing — its a Big Government thing.

  • red neck

    To me stop-n-frisk is nothing more than an over reach of law “enforcement” in order to “keep us safe”…. I look at this as an excuse to acclimate people to the Nazi police state and once this type of action by the police is accepted around the country then there will be check points and blockades set up all around… So I believe that this needs to be stopped before it gets out of control. And we already know what happens when power is abused…..

  • Gary L Fuller

    Only took me 2 days on here to see hypocracy. Wow! Pro liberty and pro stop and frisk? Time to unsuscribe.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Chip is just one author, and he usually gets it right. Maybe he’s been Jedi mind-melded by Obama.

  • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

    At the bottom of this Article you will find a list of Congressional Town Halls for the next week. It is important that you stay focused because Republican leaders are about to dangle shiny objects in front of you … The GOP leaders can get you to clap like a seal. http://www.redstate.com/2013/08/16/focus/

    CA, CO, FL, KS, KY, LA, MI, NC, NE, NM, NV, NY, OK, WY

    PASS IT ON and ATTEND the meetings to be informed.

    • KG

      Make sure your AR-15 is in good condition that way if the Republican Conservative traitors, like Sen. Cruz disappoint you, it will be handy for exercising you 2nd amendment ‘solution’.

      • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

        KG, THANKS for your Concern and Advice.
        Yes, Ted is my guy (American Latino).

        I guess your guy is Chris Christie – the WHITEY FATTY O’homo

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          No. KGBs guy is Karl Marx.

          • TIME

            Dear Dave,
            Or perhaps the person’s who funded both, Karl Marx’s and Engels as in who hired these two special people to write their Manifesto of the NWO, the Rothschild’s..
            Peace and Love.

          • KG

            Have you ever been probed by an Alien? When I was probed she left and went back to Mexico!

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            So since then you can’t let your bitterness to go?
            You just still poison your life.
            If she was wrong, she’ll reap consequences.
            “…for whatever a man SOWS, that he will also REAP.” (Galatians 6:7)”

            “Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give
            place to wrath; for it is written, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord … ” (Romans 12:19)

            Let it go and get your life back.

    • No Name

      It is obvious, the democrat/left sleaze dangled something under your nose, you bit,then swallowed ,Hook Line AND Sinker. YOU are clapping for the sitting presidents socialization of this country, and you refuse to see what is happening under your own nose. Look at Greece, Cuba, and Spain. Do you not see? Spain had clean streets, and in less than 4 years under socialist policies, there is crap streets, crap sewage disposal, crap education, and everything else is following in line.

  • carl_AF

    I read all these comments that the stop and frisk is unConstitutional. Maybe so, but my right to defend myself is also unConstitutional. Give the good people their training and right to carry then we will not need the stop and frisk.

    • Hans Lipschitz

      Very good point!

    • red neck

      Why do you insist that your right of self preservation is unconstitutional?
      New York has one of the most if not the most stringent “gun control” laws in all of the country however calling something a “law” does not necessarily grant that the lawmakers are within the constitutional limits of their authority…. I look at obama-care and see a very disturbing trend of the courts deeming laws in a biased direction based on nothing but their own personal opinion….

      • carl_AF

        I didn’t mean for this to sound as though the right to carry in unconstitutional. I was trying to sound sarcastic and my eye tooth was covered by ny tongue. In fact, I do lawfully carry.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Stopping and Frisking without a warrant is indeed UnConstitutional.
      But your right to defend yourself is Constitutional.
      I’m assuming, carl, that was just a mistake on your part.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        TODH, while what you are saying is correct, it can be gotten around it. The judges can issue a broad sweep warrants in which the Constitution can be gotten around and then the issue can be fought out in the courts.

        • vicki

          The 4th amendment is rather clear about broad sweep warrants. Nothing to “get around”. They are unconstitutional. That government ignores the constitution is not a new activity.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Correct again, but a government which ignores its own Constitution once will continue to ignore it in the future. It showed it had no fear of its people in the first instance.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Not Constitutionally, Nad.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Not Constitutionally. Correct. But the Constitution has been ignored already so it can be ignored again. The premise is that the people who ignored the Constitution in the instance that they disregarded it were not stopped then they believed that they got approval to disregard it and any other future disregard of the Constitution is also approved.

  • Hans Lipschitz

    While the program may be out of control, the judge overstepped her duties & ruled based on her philosophy & biases towards the police. Based on the 19 cases brought before her, there were no violations of civil rights. Acvtist judges on the right or left are wrong, period!!

    • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

      Judge is an activist as Racist Activist Sonia Sotomayor.

      Do you remember that U.S. Supreme Court, reversed a decision by Sonia Sotomayor and two other judges (the Ricci vs. DeStefano Discrimination case, New Haven, CT) said a Connecticut city violated WHITE Firefighters’ rights by canceling planned promotions because no BLACKS qualified. http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/rule-of-law/judicial-activism/cases/ricci-v-destefano

      • Hans Lipschitz

        Yes, I remember….., In this stop & frisk baloney, there is no racism, this is where the crimes are being committed, so this is where the cops go & stop people… but, you just can’t pull people over without a justifiable reason!

        The judge basically said, in a area that is 95% black, and where 99% of the crimes are committed by blacks, you gotta pull over & stop at least maybe 40% whites, 20% asians for it to be fair…THAT IS INSANITY!!! Forced diversity & social engineering, hallmarks of the loony Left has now come to policing!

  • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

    Mark R. Levin (Constitutioanlist Lawyer) has made the case that the principles undergirding our society and governmental system are unraveling. If we cherish our American heritage, he contends, then it is time to embrace a constitutional revival. In THE LIBERTY AMENDMENTS, Levin turns to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution itself for guidance in restoring the American Republic, proposing eleven amendments to the Constitution and explaining how each one could help restore our American Republic.

    For a century, the Statists have steadfastly constructed a federal Leviathan, distorting and evading our Constitutional system in pursuit of an all-powerful, ubiquitous central government. The result is an ongoing and growing assault on individual liberty, state sovereignty, and the social compact.
    http://www.marklevinshow.com/common/page.php?pt=Mark+Levin+to+hold+book+signing+at+the+Reagan+Library+September+7th&id=4503&is_corp=0

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      I’m not impressed by the two amendments that are stated in the promo for the book:

      1) Term Limits.
      A placebo. If the people aren’t educated in the Principles of Freedom or just don’t care, they will just put another loser in Leadership position.

      2) Limits on federal taxing and spending.
      It is well known by people who study politics that Limits on Government Spending would just provide a Floor on Government Spending. Why would we want to Limit the Spending Cuts? Instead we should be Shrinking the Leviathan Government every chance we get until we get them back to the 5% of GDP that our country got along just fine on for over 100 years.

      Why would we want to waste the Billions of dollars that it would take for such an undeniably weak change to the Constitution?
      A much simpler fix would be to remove the “General Welfare Clause”, and clarify the “Commerce Clause” so it can only be used to stop States from favoring their in-state Crony Capitalists at the rest of our expense.
      In fact, it would probably be even better to remove the Commerce Clause altogether, since protectionism hurts the states which implement it more than it hurts anybody else. Let them be fools if they choose so that other people can learn from their mistakes.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Since the departure by the people of the city of NY from the Constitution by even electing someone the likes of Bloomberg and the probable election of someone like Wiener, you are expecting sense and reason from the police in dealing with that populace. The worry should be that this city’s contagion does not spread across the country.

      • KG

        What the commerce clause does more than anything else is help show that Congress has the power to regulate Business in accord to the Preambles dream of ‘a more perfect union.’ You speak like a typical tea bagger. One who complains about the very document he claims to defend! Which one is it? Oh, i see, you want to ‘get back’ to the original Constitution. How many ‘other persons’ do you want to import and sell?

  • Yankeelouie

    The only probable cause is their skin color and that does not cut it. It is a bad policy and a slippery slope. Of course it has positive results in a city where you are not able to legally defend yourself. This means the arrests are not for real crimes but for “possesion.” It also requires no police work beyond collaring people. Left to it’s logical concusions, the police would be arresting you for possesion of 32 once flask of 7up. Remember this city still has the Sullivan Act. so carrying a pen knife is also illegal. In a day when the overmilitarization of the police is commonplace, this article is inconsistent with the thinking of most of the authors on this website. I don’t know if the rating system is applicable to this article but I give it zero stars.

  • dan

    I waited for it , Chip….but you never got to the punch line :
    Cops are handcuffed …and loving it !
    i say bind them and take away their tazors and guns (or at least their bullets)

  • MsTheresaKelly1

    Random searches are unconstitutional period! Regardless if its done to minorities or white people. The “safety,” argument has what’s gotten us in this mess.
    Remember, those who are willing to give up liberty for safety, deserve NEITHER!

  • Karolyn

    So now Chip is an advocate for the police state!

    • Average_Joe56

      It certainly appears that way…..

      • TIME

        Dear Joe,
        You as well all others who are with eyes and ears open may wish to look into;
        Brother Nathan just use your search for his you tube videos.
        Also look into: V the Guerrilla Economist
        So really great stuff these two have to present, and by the way as they both are 100% correct its easy to connect the dots to make the picture very clear.
        Peace and Love

  • KG

    It’s just like what W’s attorney general John Ashcroft said – “…the good have nothing to fear.”

    • equestrian_colt

      So are you saying your ok with this

  • TheOriginalDaveH

    What? Did I wake up on the wrong side of the bed? Is Chip really arguing against the 4th Amendment?
    http://www.cato.org/pubs/constitution/amendments_en.html
    “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”.

    Putting us all in rubber rooms would be safer also, but is that really the kind of world you want, Chip?
    Achtung! Wir fordern die Beachtung!

    • KG

      What Chip really showed is the underling proclivity of Libertarians towards Fascist types of governing. Libertarians only want liberty for themselves. The undesirables can take a shower in that shed next to the crematorium.

      • vicki

        Chip showed no such thing. Chip (if it was chip) wrote his opinion. Comments from well known Libertarians in this thread is the evidence for my assertion.

        • KG

          The general consensus of Libertarian thought is evidence for my assertion.

          • FreedomFighter

            Dipstick Strikes…measurement reads full.

          • WTS/JAY

            Don’t you mean, evidence of your “confusion”?

          • KG

            I’m not confused. Pinochet was a libertarian. Franco was a libertarian. Juan Perón, the Argentine military officer, was a libertarian.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            And you are a liar, KGB.
            Here’s an article by Murray Rothbard — The Father of Libertarianism:
            http://mises.org/journals/lf/1975/1975_07.pdf

          • KG

            I’m not lying. Every one of these men instituted ‘Austrian Economics’ in their respective countries. As well as being Catholic ‘holier than thou’ religious moralists. These two characteristics are endemic to the libertarian mindset.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Read the article I posted, Liar.

          • KG

            I read that article which, BTW, was published in 1975, and the author, Mr Rothbard, admits that Pinochet’s Chilie was using “Chicago School Friedman” economics, which is a branch of Austrian School!

            It seems that since no one actually says “Libertarian”, you assume that it’s not. When, in fact, taken as a whole, the Chilean dictatorship was the epitome of a libertarian dictatorship. You remind me of a kid in elementary school who is always right about everything.

            This reminds me of you.

            http://mindfulconstruct.com/2011/07/15/6-reasons-im-right-about-everything-youre-always-dead-wrong/

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            KGB,
            Friedman was not remotely related to the Austrian School of Economics.
            It’s doubtful that you don’t really know that, so the only rational conclusion I can come to is that you’re purposely spreading misinformation.
            You’re a lying slanderer, KGB, but then we’ve known that for a long time.

          • KG

            Milton Friedman: “I Think the Austrian Business-Cycle Theory Has Done the World a Great Deal of Harm”
            This is from a 1998 interview with Milton Friedman:
            EPSTEIN You were acquainted with the Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek and also are familiar with the work of Ludwig von Mises and his American disciple, Murray Rothbard. When you were talking about bad investments, you were alluding to Austrian business-cycle theory. A certain concept that has pretty much gone into our parlance and understanding fits in with what you said about what happened in Asia. There can be times and conditions in which the stage can be set for malinvestment that leads to recession.
            FRIEDMAN That is a very general statement that has very little content. I think the Austrian business-cycle theory has done the world a great deal of harm. If you go back to the 1930s, which is a key point, here you had the Austrians sitting in London, Hayek and Lionel Robbins, and saying you just have to let the bottom drop out of the world. You’ve just got to let it cure itself. You can’t do anything about it. You will only make it worse. You have Rothbard saying it was a great mistake not to let the whole banking system collapse. I think by encouraging that kind of do-nothing policy both in Britain and in the United States, they did harm.

            I’m sorry. Friedman is a Republican ‘trickled down” guy. I had him confused with the ‘destroy everything’ guy. Von Misies. Didn’t mean to get my Fascist Economists mixed up.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Thanks for revealing you own dishonesty, KGB.
            And that is why you have no credibility on this board.

            So you think, KGB, that it is better to bail out the badly-run banks with taxpayer money, so as to throw more good money after bad? I thought you were a Communist? Since when do Communists support Bankers, especially bad Bankers? I think your comment is just another piece of the puzzle that spells SHILL.

          • KG

            quote: And that is why you have no credibility on this board.
            I’ll take that as a complement! TY! AFK! BRB! LOL!

          • WTS/JAY

            You indeed, are, confused. The above mentioned were in fact, Dictators, and not, Libertarians! Next you’ll be telling me that the “Crusaders” of the middle ages, were Christians…?

          • WTS/JAY

            You indeed, are, confused. The above mentioned were in fact, dictators! Now, they may have pretended, and even claimed to be Libertarians, but the end result of their actions proves otherwise. That is the thing with people who crave power and control, they will say anything you want to hear, and claim to be whatever will grease the skids to carry them to their coveted position. Me, you, all of us, must seriously start exercising a little more “critical-thinking” when evaluating political-prospects.

      • TheOriginalDaveH

        Chip isn’t a Libertarian, numbnuts.

  • robot999

    Okay, this is ridiculous. I’m outta here. I’ll find a REAL LIBERTY site to get my news.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Why did you bother announcing yourself. No one would have known and you could have left quietly, so it has nothing to do with getting your news here or anywhere else.Hence the parting shot of finding a Real Liberty site to your news. This is a peevish temper tantrum by a Dem/Prog/Leftist, it should follow with a foot stomp “so there”, but we won’t see it just imagine it.

      • WTS/JAY

        robot999; just another of Dave’s multiple personalities. You would think that he would assign at least one, to run his fictitious-business. But apparently they are all too busy signing up, only to cancel their PLD account(s)…just one of the many strategies in a shill’s play-book. Not the least bit creative, if you ask me.

    • KG

      There’s one called Stormfront . They might be as conservative as PLD.

      http://www.stormfront.org/forum/

  • Patriot_Dave

    Once again the battle rages…. No Not he Conservative vs Liberal one… (even though some on PLD live for that!!) It is the battle of intellect over ignorance… This site is for PERSONAL LIBERTY yet the hard line far right simply refuses to accept that or even listen to anything that is ‘Left’ of their viewpoints…. Like it or not PEOPLE if it were not for those ‘DAMN’ Liberals you would be having these discussions in person at the town hall on friday night after you rode in on your horse!!!… LIBERTY is for ALL… not just puffed up far ‘righties’ and while the ‘lefties’ seem to inherently see that, many of YOU extreme righties DON’T….. Remember that there is at LEAST THREE sides to every story… Some of us would really appreciate it if both the far right and far left would STOP the finger pointing and ‘FLAMING’ and just DISCUSS the issues without all of the PERSONAL ATTACKS!!!

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      What is a far-right person in your mind, Patriot_Dave?
      Dave says — “Like it or not PEOPLE if it were not for those ‘DAMN’ Liberals you would be having these discussions in person at the town hall on friday night after you rode in on your horse!”.
      They were Classical Liberals, Dave, who were far removed from those who assume the label of Liberal in modern times.

      • rbrooks

        they are not assuming a label or definition. ‘you’ apply both the label and the definition. incorrectly.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          You make no sense, Flashman, as usual.

          • rbrooks

            your small mind is unable to comprehend, as usual.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            The Liberal Progressives are getting shrill in their attempts to slander and silence me.
            I must really be waking people up. That scares the hell out of the creeps.

          • vicki

            Keep up the good work.

          • Dave

            No DaveH,
            Liberals never want to silence. We need you to keep talking. You make our points better than we ever could. Keep showing everyone all about “conservatism”.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Of course you do, Dave. Silencing people can be done in many ways and you “Liberals” have done it all. You are really afraid now because people started waking up to your predatory behaviors.

          • Dave

            Silensing people is what you conservatives do… you guys are the book burners, no sex ed in school, no same sex marriage, no diversity of thought…
            But keep denying the rich history of conservatives and silencing others and being against freedom (for others of course)

          • vicki

            One of the dave’s writes (Sorry Discus has screwed up the names again)

            Silensing people is what you conservatives do… you guys are the book
            burners,

            Where?, When?

            http://www4.uwm.edu/libraries/burnedbooks/

            Note that the ones who are burning other peoples property are communists, socialists and other tyrannical types. No conservatives listed.

            It is also worth noting that if YOU own the book it is your fundamental right to burn it.

            no sex ed in school,

            That is not silencing people. It is however insisting that (public) school is not the right place to teach sex.

            no same sex marriage,

            Marriage is a religious institution, not a liberal nor conservative one.

            no diversity of thought…

            This entire website is proof that the statement is false. We have even come to your defense when the owners, who have every right to silence you (it is THEIR property), wanted to do so.

            But keep denying the rich history of conservatives and silencing others and being against freedom (for others of course)

            We have no need to deny what does not exist. And you have yet to provide ANY evidence to the contrary.

          • WTS/JAY

            What is “Silensing”? LOL!

          • Average_Joe56

            “What is “Silensing”?”

            Proper spelling for a liberal who graduated college MCL(Magna Cum Loser).
            ;)

          • Hans Lipschitz

            Au Contraire, mi misguided friend….the modern day Liberal borders on Communism with their desperate attempts to silence!

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Polly want a cracker? Baaaraaaak!

      • medbob

        Touche!!! The Labels of “Liberal” and “Conservative” have drifted far afield from where they started at the birth of our country. I don’t really see Fascism as a valid viewpoint in the “Right vs Left” debate. It is universally wrong, based upon our standards.
        Today, “Conservative” has come to mean someone who BELIEVES on the deepest level that the Constitution must be interpreted as stone, inscripted at the beginning of our country, and commented by the Federalist Papers.
        “Liberal” has come to mean those for whom the Constitution is an inconvenient document; filled with “Negative Rights”, and standing in the way of “Progress”. For them it is all about what the words can be twisted to mean, and about taking the adversarial Courtroom approach and applying it’s rear view to forward looking reality. “Whatever can be argued can be done” is the catchphrase in this twisted view.

        In the days of our founding, the definitions were very different. Conservative = Tyranny (of King George), and Liberal = The New Constitutional Way. Hence the modern term “Libertarian”. With the roots of the term Liberal being in the middle of the concept of “Liberty”, it is truly a strange and twisted age in which we live. Still, we must live in it. Those of us rooted in the principles of the Constitution, are now proud of the label “Conservative”, as we have redeemed that term, and given it a proud heritage.

        Chaos and Order are very much different that the definitions that are being pinned today. Come out with us and return to a time when words mean things, and we live by our principles and our standards. IMHO, chaos = Corruption. Corruption = Power. Power must be returned to the Individual and the State, where it belongs.

      • Patriot_Dave

        TheOriginalDaveH there is a huge difference between Liberal and Leftist…. The ‘liberals’ I know will have nothing to do with ‘leftist’ ideals and likewise the conservatives I know are true conservatives, they desire to protect society from the influence of STATE-ISM, FASCISM, SOCIALISM and COMMUNISM…. Our REPUBLIC is STRONG because it is INCLUSIVE and will to be accepting of a broad range of ideas… take that away and we have NADA!!!!!… THe far right wingers and the far left wingers… they only want what they want for themselves…screw everyone else…. THAT is not the TRUE SPIRIT of CONSERVATISM…. So… when I see anyone on here flame a responder for what they think is a ‘leftist ideal’ when in reality it is a rational ideal, meant for ALL. Then I have to take the stance that they are NOT truly conservative…..

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Dave, you didn’t even come close to answering my question.
          What makes a person a right-winger in your mind? And how can you class people when you don’t even know how to describe that class?
          Also what is a far-left winger in your mind?

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Don’t take this the wrong way, but who are you talking to, Leftist. You and your Leftist ideologue buddies are flailing badly on this site and have not been able to hammer down the Conservatives and Libertarians with all your verbiage so now you pull the “be reasonable ploy”.

      • Patriot_Dave

        Nadzieja Batki there is no PLOY in asking PLD readers to be reasonable…It’s just common courtesy… Unless your are going to tell me next that COURTESY is LEFTIST IDEA!!! I stand firmly in the MIDDLE of the ROAD BATKI… I see and respond to the best IDEAS from both sides and how these ideas will impact the masses ( the 80-20 rule) BUT I REFUSE to back down to EITHER sides wild rants…BTW… Where in tar-nation are you from???

        • WTS/JAY

          Fence-sitting produces nothing of value. A fence-sitter is one who is afraid to have an opinion, and rather, simply points out the flaws of what everyone else is saying. Dislikeable to all. The exceptions are those fence-sitters that really don’t give a chit and make fun of everything, who are liked by all.

    • KG

      Sorry Dave. But it’s like what Thomas Jefferson said about religious people:

      Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions.

      Thomas Jefferson
      In a letter to Van der Kemp, 1816

      http://www.sullivan-county.com/deism/jeff_letters.htm

      • TheOriginalDaveH

        You have no credibility, KGB.

        • KG

          LOL! AFK! BRB!

          • WTS/JAY

            Are you chocking on your own words, KG?

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            The Bible chocking him.

      • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

        Alinsky’s RULES FOR RADICALS

        Rule #5: RIDICULE is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it INFURIATES the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
        Does NOT work here.

        Rule #8: KEEP THE PRESSURE ON. Use different tactics and
        actions and use all events of the period FOR YOUR PURPOSE. It is this that will CAUSE THE OPPOSITION TO REACT to your advantage.
        Does NOT work here.

        Rule #9: The THREAT is more terrifying than the thing itself.
        Does NOT work here.

        Rule #11: PICK THE TARGET, FREEZE IT, PERSONALIZE IT, POLARIZE IT. Identify a RESPONSIBLE individual. IGNORE
        attempts to shift or spread the blame.
        Does NOT work here.

        According to Alinsky, the main job of the ORGANIZER is to ATTRACT/DRAW AN OPPONENT INTO REACTING. “The
        enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”

        THE END ALWAYS JUSTIFIES THE MEANS.

        WHY it does not work?
        Because the TRUTH is the BEST WEAPON against the indefensible policies of the Marxists/Communists Lefty.

        THE FIRST RADICAL KNOWN TO MAN who rebelled against the
        establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — LUCIFER.” The kingdom here, on the Earth. The kingdom for the Leftists’ servitude.

        KG, are you Luciferian?

        • KG

          Luke 11:14-21

          King James Version (KJV)

          14 And he was casting out a devil, and it was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered.

          15 But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.

          16 And others, tempting him, sought of him a sign from heaven.

          17 But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth.

          18 If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub.

          19 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out? therefore shall they be your judges.

          20 But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            And??? NOTHING new!!!
            You always stop on the middle and NEVER finish passage. You always cut at the moment of the main meaning of the message to be revealed.

            Let’s finish the passage, the main message of which
            is: A House Divided Cannot Stand

            Luke 11:14-23

            21 When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, HIS GOODS ARE IN PEACE.

            22 But when a stronger than he comes upon him and overcomes him, he takes from him all his armor in which he trusted, and divides his spoils.

            23 He WHO IS NOT WITH Me IS AGAINST ME, and he who does not gather with Me scatters.

            P.S. For pushing your agenda you always cheating by twisting, distorting and misquoting the Scripture.

            W A R N I N G
            “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.” (Deuteronomy
            4:2)

            “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you SHALL NOT add to it nor take away from it.” (Deuteronomy 12:32)

            “Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a LIAR.” (Proverbs 30:6)

            “For[i] I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things,
            God will add[j] to him the plagues that are written in this book; 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of
            the book of this prophecy, God shall take away[k] his part from the Book[l] of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Revelation 22:18-19)

            He who is in me is GREATER than he who is in you/world. (1Jn.4:4)

          • KG

            I was merely pointing out the fact that I could not be the son of perdition, as you keep judging me as, for then I would be of the same evil I am fighting against. It seems from your highly judgmental attitude as well as your fear of ‘spiritual hijinks’, i think you may be Pentecostal. I was in the Pentecostal church as well. I have spoken in tougnes and been ‘slain in the spirit’. But then I discovered many so-called ‘pagan’ primitive religions have been doing the exact same things.

            I could put any person in a room full of people, singing, chanting, in a constant rhythmic fashion (which is the basis of most gospel music) and induce them to speak tongues. Besides signs and wonders are the sign of the Antichrist, not G-d. Read about Jesus’ temptation in the Desert. What did Satan offer Jesus? Health, Wealth, and Miracles. What does the Modern Christian Church preach?

            Matthew 4

            King James Version (KJV)

            4 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil………….

            Read the rest and you shall know that the modern Church is the Antithesis of what Christ wanted.

      • WTS/JAY

        He also had this, to say about liberal-progressives and their love of big, mommy-government.

        “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” ―Thomas Jefferson

    • WTS/JAY

      Could your, comment, be considered a personal attack? Of course it can, and it is, a personal attack. How clever of you, Dave. Your blatant -hypocrisy brings to mind a saying; consider, when you point a finger at someone, that there be three, pointing back at thee…(-:

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      What is far right to you, Dave?
      Both of the terms Left and Right have taken on so many different political meanings as to be almost useless in conversations.

      • Patriot_Dave

        Pretty simple in concept… Those that would replace Constitutional Rights with Tyranny, Fascism, Corporatism, Statism or with Socialism, Communism or with Sharia Law mark the outer boundaries… So it really becomes a battle of Freedom vs Tyranny…. If you don’t support any of the outer fringe areas then it is only a matter common sense vs the total cost of progress…. Many say ‘fence’ can’t change a thing… I say lets get rid of the FENCES… We are all in this together… As long as we battle over semantics nothing gets solved and we slide into chaos !!

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          I asked you for a simple answer, and you gave me a non-definitive one.
          Who’s battling over semantics? I would just like to know what you mean. And I still don’t. Maybe it would be best for you to lay off the labels if you don’t know how to define them.

          • Patriot_Dave

            Really?!?!… You can’t look up anything can you?….Is it beneath you?…. I’m not going hand you anything on a platter… go out and figure it out for yourself…and once you think you know…go back and look at it again from every other angle until you actually see where EVERYONE else is coming from…. If you can’t or won’t do that, then you are the classic epitome of the undereducated ‘ultra right wing nut fringer’ that firmly believes they understand everything and don’t need an education (or continue to learn) because it will ruin them…. or are you somehow endowed with perfect (in your own mind) knowledge???

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You’re getting personal, Dave. I thought you advocated honest discourse without manipulation?
            Everybody has their own definition of what Left and Right mean in a political sense. I merely was wondering what yours is so I can understand what you’re talking about.
            I don’t understand why that bothers you so much.

          • Patriot_Dave

            Perhaps I mistook your enquiry for what others have unconsciously squeezed out of another orifice….. So many on this site (that have engaged in similar comments) are only interested in what They think and could care less about what anyone else thinks….. I assumed (because of the discourse) that you were going there…. My apologies… And you are most correct stating that everyone does have their own definitions of right and left…that is a problem all of it’s own….there isn’t a ‘sounding board’ if you will of the true meaning for these ideals anymore…. it’s been mostly lost in the clutter and confusion produced by ‘propaganda’ designed to keep it that way…CONFUSED…. To me a Conservative is one that prefers to stay the course, keep things that are inherently simple…simple…. those that know that we must move forward, but slowly and thoughtfully, are considered conservative ‘centrists’ those that push the moving forward to keep the balance, but that we must do this quickly, may be referred to as progressive centrists, those that hold on to old practices that the bulk of the masses (80-20 rule) find distasteful may be referred to as the ultra right (likewise those that refuse all common sense or history may actually fall on the ultra left side as well if they push the forbidden socialism on everyone)…. Unfortunately we are now seeing that Fascism in guise of corporatism and State-ism is getting into the minds of conservatives as a direct result of popular propagandists….Does this give you a better idea of where I’m coming from?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Thank you, Dave. I don’t necessarily agree, but at least I have a better idea of what you mean. I will bookmark your comment.
            By the way, I hope you do realize that your comment was loaded with manipulative words like “thoughtfully”, “distasteful”, and “common sense”. But you are only human.
            When you say “the bulk of the masses”, I hope you also realize that the “bulk of the masses” score poorly on standard tests. So to consider them to be correct merely based on their numbers is fallacious.
            For instance, Libertarian numbers are small indeed. Does that mean they’re wrong? Of course not. In fact, I would challenge you to read several of their books with an open mind and come away still thinking the way you do.
            If you’re interested, I will list some books that I think will most rock your world.

          • Patriot_Dave

            I have read many publications by Libertarians… I decided years ago that there was a a much larger view of reality that needed investigating…. However, I have discovered that popular Libertarians suffer from the same issues as any other popular individual…..Libertarian-ism is a path… I would like to propose that it is not be the only path and perhaps not even the right path… We may need to build a Bridge verses following a ‘path’ and WE may need every ones help!!!

  • Dave

    Nice to see Chip come out and be a real Conservative… We know the record of conservatives on personal liberty for some time now but many here are in denial about. It takes Chip siding with the police state mentality to bring the mental disease that is conservatism back into focus.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      PL allows all points of view — even from the Shill Trolls.

      • Dave

        Good to see they allow you to be on here DaveH after the smack down I gave you on the last WAR propaganda piece.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Smack down? Surely you jest, Dave. You are a legend in your own mind, and only there.

          • Dave

            No, DaveH, that is you… you said the Gov’s only role is to protect from foriegn and internal threats and I made you look foolish again. Enjoy your day corporatist.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You have no credibility on this board, Shill Dave.

          • Dave

            Neither do you Corporatist Shill DaveH. You have no facts, no grasp on reality. I proved you are a liar and a shill for Mises and Corporatists everywhere as you masquerade as a libertarian.
            Its embarrassing for you to get caught like this which is why you are so angry DaveH8.
            Go cry to your boss…

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Those who have read my comments regularly, and know what I really say, may wonder why Dave spends so much time trying to slander me. The answer is simple — That’s what he’s hired to do. He’s a Shill. And his purpose on this board is to keep good people from learning Principles of Freedom. Here’s a good start in that quest for knowledge:
            http://library.mises.org/books/Murray%20N%20Rothbard/For%20a%20New%20Liberty%20The%20Libertarian%20Manifesto.pdf

          • Dave

            Who’s freedom? If you mean your corporate master from running roughshod over this country for their benefit only. I do that job proudly DaveH8.
            More mises theory that has no basis in the real world of today.. Is it $5 per link to suppliment your Gov funded income in retirement daveH8?
            You are flailing around like a dying fish DaveH8.

          • Frank Kahn

            Freedom from liberal crapola. I wish theoriginaldaveh would lay off the vonmises links, it gets tiring. But, he is correct in his general assertion that the main authority of the federal government is protection from threat. There are also provisions for international treaties and trade. Even those might be viewed as protection from threats, both physical and economic. The original authority given to the federal government was extremely limited. And the constitution, with its original amendments, included many restrictions of power and authority for the federal government.

            I have paid attention to your haranguing of him for a while. I have yet to see you give him a beat down. In the end, it usually ends up sounding like a grade school argument, with “did not”, “did too” types of statements.

          • Dave

            Frank,
            That is not what DaveH said, he said that is the ONLY job. Liberal “crapola” as you put it help make this country a better place from an equality standpoint.
            You are right about one thing.. the Mises links are tiresome yet funny in their conjecture and lack of any reality based arguement.
            NC is now suppressing the vote, it takes the Fed gov to overturn such racist laws
            Corporations will not police themselves, it takes laws put for by the Gov and the Gov to enforce those laws on the environment, anti-trust, workers conditions and pay minimums… that doesn’t even touch currency and international trade.
            The Gov does have a positive role to play, as does business, as does the Unions.

          • Frank Kahn

            As always, you descend into liberal BS at the drop of a hat.

            “NC is now suppressing the vote, it takes the Fed gov to overturn such racist laws”

            More liberal horse sh1t, there is nothing racist about the new laws, just liberal crybaby crap using the race bating tactics of narrow minded asses. When the democrats stop lying and cheating in the voting in this nation then we wont need any voter ID laws on the books. Until then we need to protect honest voters from illegal voter fraud.

            “Corporations will not police themselves, it takes laws put for by the Gov and the Gov to enforce those laws ”

            NO, you little wuss, real men dont need mommy to hold their hands when they go pee pee. When government gets out of our lives, then you can die and we can live like God intended.

            “on the environment, anti-trust, workers conditions and pay minimums… that doesn’t even touch currency and
            international trade.”

            Anti-trust is the only possibly valid federal authority in this statement. Environmental issues are not a part of national governments authority. Working conditions are also a local level concern not federal.

            “The Gov does have a positive role to play, as does business, as does the Unions.”

            If you leave out the word positive, I will allow Unions to be included, but they have no positive effects for anyone except to satisfy the greed of unions at the expense of everyone else.

          • Dave

            Frank,
            Apparently you are off your meds… How many cases of voter fraud where in NC last year? I will tell you… (1). So they passed this law because there is a solution in search of a problem. Who votes early and doesn’t have the ID they want primarily? Minorities… you clearly have you head stuck in the sand.
            The rest of your BS is just corporate tripe and since you are not longer in the work force, I will chalk your rant to extreme ignorance.

          • vicki

            Ad hominem (“apparently you are off your meds..)

          • Frank Kahn

            the problem with brain dead liberals like you is that they cant put together a cognizant idea. Most racists are liberal democrats, this is evidenced by their constant racial hatred of whites. Voter ID laws pertain to everyone equally, not just minorities, if they are to damn lazy to get an ID then they don’t deserve to vote. And, a lack of proven voter fraud is not proof that it does not happen. If you have an ID saying who you are, then you get to vote one time. If you are not required to show ID you can vote for anyone you know is a registered voter.

            And you inability to understand how business works in a capitalistic economy, does not make everything that you wish was false to be corporate tripe. I don’t need to be in the workforce to understand the damage done to the system when greedy worthless unions demand 10 times the money they are worth. Most American workers seem to see the truth too, they drop unions like a hot potato when they are given the right to.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Government has no business at all in the Marketplace, foreign or domestic, Frank. They do so merely to aid their Crony Capitalists.
            If you’re tired of my mises links then don’t read them. I post them because the learned people from Mises Institute can explain Austrian economics and the principles of Freedom much better than I care to take the time to do.
            And I have not said that the main authority of the federal government is protection from threat.
            Dang, can anybody read anymore? I said — The only legitimate role of Government is to protect people from Force, whether from external sources, or from internal sources.
            A large part of the mess we’re in is because people think Government should protect us from threat.

          • vicki

            And unlike Dave who posts few to no cites to backup his proofs by bald assertion, DaveH’s cites have a lot of useful information to those willing to defeat MANY years of public school propaganda.

          • Dave

            Conjecture, opinion (extremely slanted at that) is all that corporatist DaveH brings and fools like you Vicki follow blindly. Do you ever actually read those thinks to Mises on the economy? Really?

          • Frank Kahn

            I was trying to be nice and support you and you went and screwed it all up.

            “Government has no business at all in the Marketplace, foreign or domestic, Frank. They do so merely to aid their Crony Capitalists.”

            You are totally wrong, you are putting your opinion here instead of fact. The federal government has the power and authority to levy tariffs and impose duties on international trade. It is a form of taxation of import/exports. This is not designed for crony capitalism in any way.

            “If you’re tired of my mises links then don’t read them. I post them because the learned people from Mises Institute can explain Austrian economics and the principles of Freedom much better than I care to take
            the time to do.”

            And by always just providing a link and no supporting thoughts, it makes you look wishy washy. It is tiring because you repeat it day after day after day.

            “And I have not said that the main authority of the federal government is protection from threat.”

            Yes you did, you just don’t understand the meaning of your own words. Force is a threat, the threat of using force.

            “Dang, can anybody read anymore? I said — The only legitimate role of Government is to protect people from Force, whether from external sources, or from internal sources.”

            If that “Force” is not a threat, they what would you need PROTECTION from?

            “A large part of the mess we’re in is because people think Government should protect us from threat.”

            NOPE, the mess we are in is because the federal government has illegally expanded its scope of influence beyond the defense of the nation.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            I’m talking about “legitimate” Government, Frank, not what Power they currently assume. Anything that Government does in the way of thwarting a person’s control of their own bodies and property is illegitimate.

            Frank says — “And by always just providing a link and no supporting thoughts, it makes you look wishy washy”.
            So I post my thoughts on what legitimate Government ought to look like, and Frank says — “You are totally wrong, you are putting your opinion here instead of fact”.
            I can do no right with you, Frank, can I?
            By the way, it is “fact” that a body of people (call them Government) has no legitimate right to control other people’s body and property. They just take that right.
            And I don’t care if you like my mises links or not, Frank. I only take orders from the owner of the website — Bob Livingston. You can bugger off.

            Frank says — “Yes you did, you just don’t understand the meaning of your own words. Force is a threat, the threat of using force”.
            No Frank, you don’t understand quotes. They are exact reproductions of what a person actually said. I don’t give a damn that you don’t understand the difference between Force and Threat.

            Frank says — “If that “Force” is not a threat, they what would you need PROTECTION from?”.
            Actions, Frank, not potential actions.
            I think you need to get out your dictionary, Frank, and quit bugging me.

            Frank says — “NOPE, the mess we are in is because the federal government has illegally expanded its scope of influence beyond the defense of the nation”.
            I’m talking about things like “preventative” laws, Frank, such as regulations which punish everybody because they present the “threat” of possible future actions.

          • Frank Kahn

            Don’t get stubborn and stupid, I was talking about the legitimate government and its true authority, nothing else.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No you’re not, Frank. You’re talking about a body of people who have assumed control over other people without those peoples’ consent.
            You’re the “stupid one”, Frank.
            http://mises.org/daily/3427
            “To say governments were formed to protect the rights of men would be historically incorrect. Almost all governments were formed by ruthless men exerting their will over others through the use of force. Some governments, over time, evolved toward the rule of law, perhaps only because their rulers saw that this would sanction their own continued enjoyment of the wealth that they possessed. In some instances, this evolution involved one or more “revolutions” in which those who were governed were able to better establish the rule of law”.

          • Frank Kahn

            NO, TODH, I am talking about the authority given to our government by the constitution. Who is currently in power does not effect the authority. And your vonmises link and quote have no bearing on the discussion.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You’re the one who butted in and misrepresented what I was saying, Frank. I was talking about how a Legitimate Government would be (under Natural Law). I don’t care what you’re talking about.

          • Frank Kahn

            And nobody cares what you are talking about, there is no such thing except in your deranged mind as a natural law government.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You’d best inform the Judge of that, Frank, he isn’t as smart as you are:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1P53wMbnsw
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjhNZjanX9k
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7n2m-X7OIuY
            The truth comes out. Frank can’t win with logic, so he resorts to ad hominem attack.
            You’re a loser, Frank.

          • Frank Kahn

            I am assuming that you are referring to this statement, ” there is no such thing except in your deranged mind as a natural law government.”, when you claim I made an ad hominem attack. That would be incorrect, at most it might be classified as proof by bald assertion, since I did not give supporting reasoning.

            I appreciated the opportunity to watch Judge Napolitano’s, speech on the patriot act. I consider him to be a very good and honest person that is quite knowledgeable about constitutional matters. However, there was only one time where he used the phrase “natural law”, and that was not in reference to a government. It was about our God given rights (natural rights), which are guaranteed by the first ten amendments to the constitution. So, while you might say that the constitution supports the natural law that is our natural rights, it is not a government of natural law. There is no such thing, and if you re-read all your vonmises books, you will not find any example of such a government.

            It is good, to have a government that protects our natural rights, and thereby upholds the natural law, but to say that a governments sole purpose is to do that would limit government to nothing more than a very limited police force.

            So, there is no reason to argue the point with the Judge, he did not say anything that contradicts my statement and I don’t disagree with anything he said.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You have weakened your credibility considerably by your naive denial of an ad hominem attack.
            How can — “there is no such thing except in your deranged mind” — not be considered an ad hominem attack?

            It’s obvious from your attempt to deny the blatant ad hominem attack, Frank, and other short-sighted comments that you have made, that I can’t easily educate you on the reality of natural law in a short comment. So I won’t even try.

          • Frank Kahn

            You will not attempt to try to do something that is impossible for you.

            Natural law is the law of nature. It is the basis for morality and ethics. You are short sighted in thinking that government can, or even should restrict itself to that small portion of law. You grouse over government getting involved in personal decisions? What is it doing, if it interferes with your natural rights? Interference comes in many ways, you can restrict them or you can force them.

            It was not an ad hominem attack because the object of the sentence was “natural law government”. Your demonstration, of a less than normal ability to understand what natural law means, prompted the determination that your mind is twisted (demented), on that subject. To have been a true ad hominem attack would have required your mental state as proof that the subject was true. This is an ad hominem attack.

            You are a demented liberal, so what you say has no meaning. Although, it might be true, it is attacking you instead of the issue.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            I’m not a Liberal, Ignoramus. I’m a Libertarian. And it is you who is demented to think that the Private Sector can’t do almost everything that Government can do — Cheaper, More Politely, and More Morally.
            You prove by your nasty comments what kind of people advocate Big Government — Pushy, Controlling, Self-Righteous people who usually can’t run their own lives decently, but for some reason feel qualified to run other people’s lives.
            Read this if you want to be less of an Ignoramus, Frank:
            http://mises.org/daily/2426

          • Frank Kahn

            So, you really dont have the ability to understand (comprehend) the meaning of a grammatically correct sentence. I gave an example of an ad hominem attack. If you are incapable of understanding the principle of that, it is your problem not mine.

            You have faded off target, where were we discussing private sector versus government? I have never advocated that the government be involved, in any way, when it comes to running things. They usually cost more and destroy what they try to manage.

            I am not a liberal, I like small government.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Oh right. Now Frank is giving me Grammar lessons.
            You’re a dweeb, Frank.

          • Frank Kahn

            I am giving you what you need to grow. My statement was prefaced with the warning that I was going to show you an ad hominem attack. That makes the following statement an example of the said type of attack, not a statement about you.

            Do you feel better using a childish grade school name on me? Do you even know what a dweeb is?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            So far you’ve called me — “deranged”, “twisted (demented)”, “demented liberal”, and “you really dont have the ability to understand (comprehend) the meaning of a grammatically correct sentence”.
            And you’ve beat around the bush until that poor bush was dead in your vain efforts to deny that you have attacked me instead of just addressing the issues.
            Yes, Frank, I know what a Dweeb is, and you are it.

          • Frank Kahn

            You are deranged, by the dictionary definition. Since it can be a matter of opinion (subjective). I DID NOT CALL YOU A DEMENTED LIBERAL, and that is why I am 100% correct in saying that you don’t have the ability to understand(comprehend) the meaning of a grammatically correct sentence.

            Now, if you want a real attack, based on your exhibited mental ability. You are a moronic pathetic whinny little piece of cow dung.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Surely you jest, Frank? Do you really think your childish bout of name-calling affects me?

          • Frank Kahn

            I only return childish actions when you insist on your childish name calling. And Dweeb, is a poorly defined term which includes the word dorkish. Since the people defining dweeb seem to be oblivious to the fact that a dork is a whale penis, their definition of dweeb is questionable.

          • Frank Kahn

            I only return childish actions when you insist on your childish name calling. And Dweeb, is a poorly defined term which includes the word dorkish. Since the people defining dweeb seem to be oblivious to the fact that a dork is a whale penis, their definition of dweeb is questionable.

          • Jack

            Frank Kahn:

            You are confused as many are. We did not go from the Revolutionary War straight to the Constitution.

            After the Revolution our governing document was the Articles of Confederation. Under the Articles the individual states were the premier power. The federal government was extremely weak and for the most part powerless.

            The system of government with the federal government being weak and the individual states being very powerful was a dismal failure. That failure brought about the creation of the.Constitution which replaced the Articles.

            The Constitution changed the power structure, making the federal government the premier power and the states were regulated to a secondary status. Instead of limiting the power of the federal government, the Constitution actually gave the federal very broad and expansive powers.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Jack says — “The system of government with the federal government being weak and the individual states being very powerful was a dismal failure”.
            Says you, Jack. What really happened (with a few exceptions) is that the Leaders then, as the Leaders now, are typical in that they seek more Power. That will always be the case with those who strive for Leadership. The very people who we don’t need for Leaders are the ones who gravitate to Leadership:
            http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/beware-the-psychopath-my-son/

            Read this if you want a clearer, more honest, less Court Historian, account of our colonial days:
            http://library.mises.org/books/Murray%20N%20Rothbard/Conceived%20in%20Liberty_Vol_2.pdf

          • Frank Kahn

            I am not the least bit confused, and I do know about the articles of confederation. You, however, are very mistaken about the way the government works. The constitution is a LIMITING document, that forces constraints on nobody except the federal government. And, actually, the states and ultimately the People are the final authority in all maters in this country, not the federal government.

          • Jack

            Frank Kahn:

            You are mistaken. The Constitution does impose constraints on State and local governments and even
            state judges. Check out Article I, section 10 or Article IV.
            Then there’s Article VI that makes the laws passed by Congress (along with the Constitution and treaties) as the supreme law of the land.

            The only way that the states and the people have final authority is in the power to amend the Constitution.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You’re getting desperate, Shill Dave.
            You are welcome to point out anything I’ve said to benefit any Crony Capitalists.

          • WTS/JAY

            DaveH: Those who have read my comments regularly, and know what I really say, may wonder why Dave spends so much time trying to slander me. The answer is simple — That’s what he’s hired to do. He’s a Shill.

            There can be no doubt that what you claim about the shill in question, Dave, is right on the mark, DaveH. I think the following description below best describes our in-house shill, Dave!

            A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization.

            “Shill” typically refers to someone who purposely gives onlookers the impression that they are an enthusiastic independent customer of a seller (or marketer of ideas) for whom they are secretly working.

            The person or group who hires the shill is using crowd psychology to encourage other onlookers or audience members to purchase the goods or services (or accept the ideas being marketed). Shills are often employed by professional marketing campaigns.

            “Plant” and “stooge” more commonly refer to any person who is secretly in league with another person or organization while pretending to be neutral or actually a part of the organization he is planted in, such as a magician’s audience, a political party, or an intelligence organization.

            Shilling is illegal in many circumstances and in many jurisdictions because of the potential for fraud and damage, however if a shill does not place uninformed parties at a risk of loss, but merely generates “buzz,” the shill’s actions may be legal. For example, a person planted in an audience to laugh and applaud when desired, or to participate in on-stage activities as a “random member of the audience,” is a type of legal shill.

            Shill can also be used pejoratively to describe a critic who appears either all-too-eager to heap glowing praise upon mediocre offerings, or who acts as an apologist for glaring flaws. In this sense, the critic would be an implicit shill for the industry at large, possibly because his income is tied to its prosperity.

            The origin of the term “shill” is uncertain; it may be an abbreviation of “shillaber”. The word originally denoted a carnival worker who pretended to be a member of the audience in an attempt to elicit interest in an attraction. Some sources trace the usage back to 1914. -Wikipedia

          • S.C.Murf

            The only thing you have proved davie is that YOU need to make that popping sound.

            up the hill
            airborne

          • Dave

            I did… did you miss it? I popped DaveH’s credibility again on the last W.A.R propaganda piece… I am surprised you did not hear it.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Do your handlers see all the thumbs down you get, Shill Dave? You are probably making more converts to the concepts of Freedom than I am.
            There’s going to be some ‘splaining to do, Shill Dave.

          • Dave

            Oh my… A liberal getting a thumbs down on a conservative site… shall we alert the media corporatist shill DaveH?

          • JeffH

            You’re not a liberal ignorant Dave47D…you have stated on several occasions that you are a progressive but like most of the liberals who tend to talk out their arse you get the thumbs down too.

            It’s no wonder why the only person that believes you is yourself…DUH!

          • Dave

            Jeffrey,

            Could you share with me how many liberals get thumbs up on this conservative site?

            Thanks!

          • vicki

            We did not hear about it cause it did not happen. You would actually have to bring some facts (with cites) to the discussion to even begin to affect DaveH’s credibility.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No, Shill Dave, I did not say that.
            I said the only legitimate role of Government is to protect people from the Force of others, whether from internal sources or external sources.
            You are just a lying slandering Shill Troll, Dave, and the regulars know that.

          • Dave

            LOL ok Lying DaveH, try and make your BS look better… You are caught and now like the worm you are, you try and wiggle out of it.

          • rbrooks

            well, comrade davey, you are unable to be a legend in your mind. your are lacking the mind.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            When are you going to learn, Flashman, your multiple-personality opinions are meaningless on this board.

          • vicki

            Right comment. Wrong dave

          • Dave

            Still boring Vicki…

          • vicki

            still ad hominem Dave.

          • Dave

            Not if its true Vicki, and your selective pointing out of ad hominem attacks, punctuation, debating issues is truly boring…
            Not to worry… the next 2nd Amendment article will come up shortly.

          • vicki

            Dave should consider learning the definitions. There is no actual requirement that an ad hominem be false.

            http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

            http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad%20hominem

            As to selective pointing out… That’s not my problem. Dave can do it himself. He’s (theoretically) a big boy.

            (Note dave has started pointing out what he believes to be ad hominem. Then often follows up[ with one of his own.)

          • WTS/JAY

            Yes you are, Dave, you’re still boring.

          • WTS/JAY

            Smack down? Isn’t that WWF lingo? So now we’re made aware of how mamma’s boy occupies his time in between blogging and not running his business. LOL!!!

    • medbob

      Uh… This is NOT Conservatism. In fact, I don’t think that it EVEN rises to the level of Neo-Conservatism.

      • Dave

        Sure it is medbob…
        Reagan expanded the Fed Gov and it was his administration blocked off Penn Ave in front of the WH, stopped protests from being near the president after Reagan’s assassination attempt.
        George W Bush and the Conservative GOP Congress gave us the Patriot Act.
        Your conservative presidents have a record. Pity many here forget that record.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          They’re not Conservatives, Shill Dave. They’re NeoConservatives.
          Don’t you have an International Sales job to do?

          • Dave

            Exhibit A:
            This example put forth corporatist DaveH illustrates how conservatives get out of any responsibility for what they do.
            Reagan is no longer a conservative… he isa a neo-Con… So is his disciple George W Bush. That is the great thing about being a conservative, you just change your label when you F’up royally.
            DaveH will be known as Neo-DaveH after the whipping I gave him on anoher thread.

          • http://socialsity.com/ LastGasp

            You seem like a reasonably intelligent person, so why don’t you try contributing something that’s useful instead of constantly instigating arguments? This forum could be used for real discussion, but it always ends up with you arguing with someone about your own agenda, not the context of the article. Go crow your accomplishments somewhere else so we don’t have to listen, it gets old.

          • Dave

            LastGasp,
            So you are telling me that when W.A.R, Chip, Bob Livingston, Ben, John Myers write their incredibly slanded articles, if I have a contray position
            I should just shut up about it and let everyone else who believes the same way agree all the time?
            I have thoughts and opinions too… I am sorry if I am a fly in your ointment, I am truly sorry but I will not shut up in the face of conservative propaganda. I will challenge it.
            Sincerely,
            Dave

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            What opinions? All we hear from you are your ad hominem attacks and other lowlife manipulative tactics.

          • Dave

            ad hominem, proof by bald assertion

          • JeffH

            POLLY WANT MORE CRACKERS?

          • vicki

            The proof is in all of your posts dave.

          • vicki

            At least be a useful fly and bring some facts to the ointment.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No, Dave, he’s telling you that you don’t state your contrary position. Instead you just launch ad homimem attacks and other typical Liberal Progressive manipulative actions.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Because he is a Shill, LastGasp. His purpose here is to disrupt the board.

        • medbob
          • Dave

            The Cato Institute? The corporatist think tank part owned by David Koch?
            Reagan also triped our national debt in his fervor to reduce taxes…So lets review the Reagan legacy on economics….Reduced regulation and laid the ground work for more boom and bust markets including the 2008 collapse, reduced regs on credit to mask the middle class’s shrinking economic power so it was easier to gain credit/credit cards and spent money like a drunken sailor.
            The CATO institute is merely a corpoartist front group.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Reduced regulation? Who do you expect to believe that, Shill Dave? Certainly not anybody with any brains.
            http://www.scribd.com/doc/144210931/Wayne-Crews-Ten-Thousand-Commandments-An-Annual-Snapshot-of-the-Federal-Regulatory-State-2013

          • medbob

            Corpratist… My guess is that you must be part of the 99%. I will waste no more time on you.. Go poop against a Police Car somewhere…

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No, medbob, Dave is part of the 1% — the State and their Crony Capitalists. That is why he tries so hard to suppress any pro-Freedom commenters.

          • Dave

            Pro-freedom… LOL… thats rich coming from you…

          • vicki

            ad hominem.

          • Dave

            Yawn

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Feel free, Diaper Dave, to evidence anything I’ve said that isn’t Pro-Freedom.

          • Dave

            ad hominem,
            Your corporatism attitude leads to monopolies which leads to less competition which leads to less freedom for the consumer.
            Thats one…
            #2, your anti-union attitude ensures only your crony capitalists have access to politicians on capital hill which leads to less benefits, less pay because those same crony capitalists you support got us bad trade deals which we do business with countries that pay workers pennies on the dollar…
            Lost wages equals loss of finanical freedom…

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You’re confused, Shill Dave. Free Markets are the antithesis of Corporatism (Crony Capitalism). And no Monopoly has ever existed in Free Markets. Monopolies can only exist with the Force of Government.
            Your #2 comment is circular reasoning, since I have not, and never will, support Crony Capitalism. That’s apparently your bag, Shill Dave, or you wouldn’t try so hard to denigrate somebody who believes in Free Markets.
            You are just a psycho, Shill Dave, who is doing his childish best to stop the Free Flow of information.

          • vicki

            For our amusement create a straw-man monopoly and explain how it survives in a free market.

          • Dave

            I have done this several times in the past, but that reality doesn’t exist i your theorical world.
            In your world, 10 widget makers all stay in business and through competition they keep R&D up, prices manageable and salaries competitive…
            In your world, Company 6 and Company 5 don’t merge their firms and buy out Company 7 and 8 to create 1 larger firm that has a stronger cash position to buy the materials needed to make the widget more cheaply by volume negotiations… so because of that Company 1 declares its going out of business. Company 2,3, and 4 realize they must merge to keep pace with the new firm from the combination of Companies 5,6,7… so before you know it… There are 3 firms left… Only company 10 hasn’t merged… But they decided that in order to stay in business, they need to shut down US operations and move their production facilities to Mexico/Asia or Africa where workers get paid pennies on the the dollar. So their US workers are out of a job… But Company 10 is profitable through outsourcsing…
            One day the 3 firms that are left communicate with each other… They say, “instead of trying to fight all the time, lets cooperate to set pricing and production levels” so they come up with a strategy to fix prices so the 3 firms that are left can control the profit and the execs in the firms make tons of money…
            But that can’t happen in your world right Vicki?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            How could they exist, Shill Dave, in a Free Market? Unless, of course, they please their customers so well that no other company of people would want to compete with them? And in that case, why would you care?
            Only Government-guaranteed Monopolies can exist for any length of time, and it’s funny, Shill Dave, that I’ve never heard you complaining about them.

          • vicki

            Monopolies can only exist where force (usually government force) prevents competition

          • dave

            Prove it Vicki… can you?

          • Dave

            Look up who controls the CATO group medbob… Look how much big money influence they buy for their own benefit alone.
            Don’t believe me… follow the money.

          • vicki

            Guilt by association. Proof by bald assertion.
            Still not even an attempt at proof.

          • Dave

            Yawn

          • medbob

            I follow the money. It leads from the DNC to Fisker and Solyndra and right back to the DNC again. Engorged with MY money…
            Yeah, I follow the money. Right out of my pocket and to the likes of the DNC and Cronies.

          • Dave

            I am not saying that the corrupt DNC are any better but the RNC/Conservatives’s hands are even dirtier.
            You would know this if you bothered to look anything up instead of relying on the corporatists on the conservative side to feed you your propaganda.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            We’re still waiting for you to provide any kind of evidence for your claims, Shill Dave.

          • vicki

            Dave should follow his own sage advice.

          • WTS/JAY

            Dave: I am not saying that the corrupt DNC are any better but the RNC/Conservatives’s hands are even dirtier.

            That’s like saying; both, Hitler and Stalin were murderers, but Hitler murdered less people, therefore, Hitler is less of a monster. Your fervent-defence of Hitler is quite understandable, and comes as no surprise, Dave, as you have expressed your deep-admiration for Hitler on many occasions. Sieg Heil! (heels clicking)

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            “Follow the money”. You’re a joke, Shill Dave.
            As I always told my children, you should listen to everybody — even mentally handicapped people can come up with good ideas.
            Note, Dave, that I’m not calling you mentally-handicapped.
            That would be an insult to mentally-handicapped people.

          • WTS/JAY

            LOL!!!

          • vicki

            Argument to ridicule. Guilt by association. Proof by bald assertion. Not bad. Not useful in any discussion other than how not to argue a point.

          • Dave

            Yawn

          • WTS/JAY

            Does thinking make you sleepy, boo boo?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            So what is it that Cato advocates that you have a dispute with, Shill Dave?

          • WTS/JAY

            DaveH: So what is it that Cato advocates that you have a dispute with, Shill Dave?

            Individual liberty, limited government, free markets, prosperity, peace, the Constitution, government- accountability, a robust-industry, self-responsibility, work…i could go on.

          • Dave

            Here is a perfect way to look at things:

            “Liberalism,” which, according to Paul Waldman, may be stated in one easily-articulated sentence:

            “We are all in it together.”

            This is in stark contrast to what conservatives say:

            “You are responsible for yourself.”

            “While conservatives push the burden and responsibility and risks onto the shoulders of each individual, liberals – or as some call them, progressives – call for each of us to act in a way that is not only good for themselves personally but is also good for the country as a whole. Liberals believe that we are not alone, but part of a big society; that whatever each of us does affects the rest of us; that we are all in the same boat. We are part of a community.”
            CATO, Conservatives always say its about “me”, whats in it for “me”… That thinking leads to great greed and that greed is tearing this country down. Liberals know that for America to be great, it has to be about the “we”. It is that selfish conservative ideal that is hurting this country. I find it comical that some in the military call themselves conservative when the whole military structure is around the “we”. The military does better when they work together for the greater mission just like the country does better when we understand that we are part of a neighborhood, which is part of a town/city which is part of a state which is party of the United States of America. When you have a few people controlling the wealth which conservatives and libertarians (who have been wrongly influenced by the conservative/corporatist greed) have pushed forth.. the coubntry falls apart. When working people have a chance to share the wealth of this country like we did after WW2, the country gets stronger and better.

          • Dave

            Corporatist Dave,

            CATO wants the Gov out of business all together. So its part owner ther Koch’s can make tons of money for Themselves

            http://catounhinged.blogspot.com/2012/03/cracks-in-kochtopus.html

            This miscalculation permeates the Koch/Cato dispute. Jonathan Adler recognized it insightfully in the early going:

            Even if one assumes that the Kochs have better ideas for how Cato should direct its resources, know more about how to advance individual liberty, and are correct that the Institute is too “ subject to the personal preferences of individual officers or directors,” any benefit from whatever changes they could make will be outweighed to the permanent damage to Cato’s reputation caused by turning it into a de facto Koch subsidiary.

            http://wallstreetonparade.com/secret-owners-of-cato-institute-surface-as-koch-brothers-move-to-take-control/

            Drink the Koo-aid if you must DaveH, but I know that the Koch Brothers don’t do anything unless it is good PR and marketing for their self-interest.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            If the Kochs could make tons of money after Government butted out of the Marketplace, it could only be because they pleased their customers more than their competitors. That’s a good thing.
            The Crony Capitalists (corporatists), who you support, would then have to work to make a living by pleasing their customers instead of getting special protection from Government and taxpayer bailouts.

          • Dave

            In a perfect world, yes but you will not admit to the idea that a “free” market environment could lead to collusion and monopolies because a few companies rise to the top by various capitalistic and not so capitalistic means and have the power to buy or suppress competition.
            You simply won’t allow yourself to see reality… only the Von Mises opinion of reality.
            I am a liberal/progressive DaveH. I want NO bailouts for big business, I don’t want special protection either… It terms of the big banks, I want the Gov to break them up and more heavily regulate them because of their unique place in the economy. Too big to fail should not happen. Too big to fail definately can happen and more regularly with no Gov involvement.
            As I have said multiple times… the solution is big money out of the political process. If you care about this country, you would be in that fight as well.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            There will always be collusion, but in Unfree Markets, the Force of Government is brought to bear to aid greatly in that collusion. In Free Markets, they can only get away with it until their customers get wind of their antics and they become some other company’s customers.
            I’ve been hearing the “Big Money out of Politics” for my entire adult life. It hasn’t happened and it won’t happen without a totalitarian state in which the Politicians and their Pals dominate everybody else.
            I care about my country, which is why I will do everything I can to keep you Progressive Shills from spreading your nonsense.

        • medbob

          There are two wings to the GOP. The Rino wing (Or Democrat-Lite), and the Conservative wing.
          Don’t take me as a Happy GOP patsy. It will take radical and drastic action to get back on course as the Founders Intended.

          • Dave

            What did the founders intend as they lived in a Agriculture based economy with 3 million citizens of which only have the adults could vote at the time?
            Please share… should we go back to that time?

          • Dave

            “half” to “have”
            How was global trade set up at the time as well while you are at it… How about communications globally?

          • medbob

            Straw man. Communication, industry, computers, teleportation or faster-than-light travel have no (Zero) impact on the Human equation.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            So what was wrong with that choice to have males who had their survival in mind as a prerequisite to voting,and no it was not a Agriculture based economy because no country can survive on solely agriculture. We had a balance of agriculture, industry, tradesmen, and we managed to keep a balance. Problems we ran into when you have certain portions of populace wanting their groups favored by government.

          • medbob

            I will humor you only for the sake of those who are reading this thread.
            The principles embodied in the Constitution, which is volumes smaller than the ACA or other fully detailed, flow charted unicorn plan of the day, are simple and are based on the experience of thousands of years of History and a clear-eyed evaluation of Human Nature.
            I know that y’all believe that Humans are progressing to new levels of competence, honor, and elevated capabilities. Realists recognize that Humans in essence, have not changed in a thousand, let alone 200 years.
            ALL of the principles are still workable and valid in a modern world.
            Such an argument as is posited above over estimates the impact of changes on what has been proven to be the best form of government that has ever been proposed.

          • WTS/JAY

            Very well stated, medbob!!! Kudos!

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Why are you trying to take us back to Feudal days, Dave, where the people served their Government?

          • Dave

            No DaveH, I guess what I thought is true… you don’t read your own links… Von Mises uses that period for their examples and all you “constitutionalists” talking about going “back”… Thats when the documents were written and in that context, we were a 3M population, agriculture based economy. That was when the Constution was written.
            But alas, the country and the world has changed somewhat since then.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No Dave, we “constitutionalists” don’t talk about “going back”. We talk about the concepts of Freedom. You talk about the concepts of Subjugation which are as old as humanity.

          • Dave

            Wrong, you talk in concepts of corporatism, selfishness and greed rolling into “free market” corpoartist based propaganda.
            Again, you don’t read your own links… On econoomic matters, Mises consistantly pulls from the 1800’s before the industrial transformation has happened.
            You and mises clearly want to go back.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Who do you think you’re fooling, Dave? Certainly not me. And most likely not anybody else who reads the books that I’ve linked to.
            You are failing in your Shilling efforts. Perhaps you should consider giving your handlers their money back.

          • Dave

            I am not trying to “fool” anyone… But you on the other hand are.
            You want the corporatists to take over through shrinking of Gov so the Gov can’t effectively police a 300M person population and the largest economy in the world, I want Gov to be accountable to the people and to be a check against corporate and union abuse. I also want gov to put its people first, not corporatists.
            You live in a theoretical fantasyland… I live here in the real world.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            They aren’t “corporatists”, numbnuts, if they aren’t being aided by Government.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Actually, Bob, the Republican Party has been the Party of Big Government and Mercantilism since their inception. So, as Bob Livingston has pointed out, a better name for them (than RINO) would be CINO (conservative in name only).
            I don’t know how they’ve done it, but they’ve fooled a lot of people for a very long time. For instance, read this article by the late great Murray Rothbard in the 1990s:
            http://mises.org/econsense/ch21.asp

          • medbob

            The swan song for the concentration of power is a very seductive thing. Add to that recipe, unlimited re-election, 90% reelection rates, overly specific spending plans, shake them up and…. Pecan Pie? NO! Out of control Government.
            Levin is on to the idea of campaigning for real reforms that occur outside the beltway, with no input from Washington politicians. With his set of Amendments, we could be on the way to righting the ship, but I worry that we are now beyond the point where we can have effective change.
            I have no love for non-patriot Repubics, who look out for themselves first, and what’s good for the country comes in third. There is corruption everywhere, but I don’t see anyone on the Democrat side that is willing to do anything about it. At least there are a couple Republicans who have good ideas. If we can keep the knives out of their back…Who knows?

  • mark

    It is often hard to keep track of the 180 degree turns on the issue of overzealous cops that this website constantly makes. But I think I have found one consistency. If cops harass white gun-owners or white anti-government activists from the South, Midwest, and West they are 100% wrong and should cease all their infringements of people’s right to innocence before they are convicted in a court of law. If on the other hand, cops harass minorities in Northeastern, Upper Midwest, and California cities they are 100% right and should be applauded for abusing innocent people’s rights. OK, now I get it! There is a distinctive pattern here. A police state for minorities OK, beautiful, we love it and are 100% in favor! A police state for white people! No, never, it is a gross and atrocious violation of our U.S. Constitutional rights!

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Thanks, Chip, for giving the Trolls some ammunition.
      That’s sarcasm, by the way.

      • rbrooks

        stop trolling davey.

        • JeffH

          POLLY WANT A CRACKER?

          • Dave

            Look, its DaveH’s assistant… Do you get a piece of DaveH’s retirement mises action to show up when DaveH gets in over his head like he always does?

          • JeffH

            Dave47D, on your best day you couldn’t wear DaveH’s dirty socks.

            I don’t think anyone whines more than you do…never stating much more than your opinion which, by the way, carries no credibility around here.

            In short, Dave47D, you’re just another ignorant self proclaimed progressive whose greatest strength is only his opinion coupled with a slew of conjecture full of ad hominems.

            As your mentor stated in Rules for Radicals:

            “An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and
            discontent… When those prominent in the status quo turn and label you an ‘agitator’ they are completely correct, for that is, in one word, your function—to agitate to the point of conflict.”

            You, of course, have failed miserably in meeting Alinsky’s high standards…but only through your own confusion and ignorance.

            “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”

            Unfortunatley for you, ignoramus Dave47D, you can’t even get that right. I’m sure Alinsky wouldn’t consider your childish 6th grade mentality as an asset in your quest that really does promote your ignorance.

            Keep posting though…it’s fun to watch you come unglued.

          • Dave

            ad hominem, conjecture and proof by bald assertion… Look Vickie… we have the trifecta!!!

          • JeffH

            Dave47D, please feel free to let me know if I left something out…I’m pretty sure I got it all in there.

            By the way, do you want some cheese to go with your whine?

          • Dave

            You do smell like limburger … I was wonder what that smell was.

          • WTS/JAY

            Dave: You do smell like limburger … I was wonder what that smell was.

            I was wonder what that smell was? And you run a business? Too funny! Lol!

          • WTS/JAY

            Look Vickie, a colonoscopy revealed the obstruction in Obama’s anal-cavity; it was Dave!

          • WTS/JAY

            Look, its Obama’s butt-plug, coming up for some fresh air.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            LOL.

          • Dave

            Jay, this is the best your limited intellect can come up with I am sure. One day you may have a thought of your own. It will be a scary day for you but stay calm… it will pass and you may continue being a parrort for corporatists like DaveH and his boss.

          • WTS/JAY

            Polly is, crackers!

    • JeffH

      YOU, mark, mark, mark are a racist and a hypocrit to boot!

      …and to think you had the audacity to complain and accuse Alondra of being a racist.

      Such an ignorant fool you always are!

    • GQ4U

      I get it mark, your facetious comments make a valid point. If we would just treat everyone as if the Constitution applied to each of us equally – which it does – then we would not have these legal discrepancies popping up in various jurisdictions. If any persons rights are violated it threatens us all. As a sovereign individual if anyone violates your rights it is in essence committing an act of war against you and retaliation is justified. Just be careful, I applaud fighting for what you believe in but there are groups of sovereigns who have banded together and forsaken their individuality to seize control of yours. They are a band of Trolls. Fight to win — no when to fight.

      PS: Ignore the trolls posting here — for now.

    • WTS/JAY

      Only a racist could have written this sort of racist-tripe. You need not continue trying to convince us you’re a racist, mark. So relax, we believe you!

  • heehaw

    I think cops should leave people alone unless they commit a crime. I think it is unjust and illegal to cuff someone just because a cop may suspect he/she might have committed a crime without any evidence, it is called “freedom of movement”. Back in the 40s and fifties, cops left citizens alone unless they were called to a crime scene.

    • redneck

      Have you seen what they are doing today?…. Arrest someone for a suspicion that they MIGTH commit a crime… Guilty until proven innocent, just wait until they start using the NDAA with discrimination against those whom oppose this tyrannical regime…. Indefinite detention without so much as defense…

      • GQ4U

        your a redneck when you get it. Nice comments, right on.

    • GQ4U

      True. Cops wouldn’t stop someone unless they looked like the suspect they were currently after.

  • CitizenVet

    Hey Chip Wood, before you waste time and cyberspace writing about an important and widely publicized civil rights case, why don’t you actually take the time to follow the case and examine the evidence that was presented (instead of merely listening to soundbites of your favorite spun “news” outlets and crying agreement in the passionate fervor of a new convert)? Your description of this case betrays your ignorance to the issues and the constitutional safeguards at challenge and you appear to have the understanding of a six-year old. And this on a site that trumpets itself as a guardian of the Constitution? REALLY?!? Wow, so disappointed this time personalliberty.

  • medbob

    Uh…. The Fourth Amendment…. Yes, there are ramifications to the liberties that we have that are God Given. Yes, the ending of “search upon demand” will probably allow more crimes to occur.
    That is merely ONE of the prices that we pay for a free society. When asked about what blood has purchased our freedom, most folks will go directly to the soldiers that have died. I would submit that there are many Civilians who give up their lives unwillingly in support of freedom. Case in point: Iraq. When a totalitarian regime was in place, crime was very low. What did they pay for that lowered crime rate? Their freedom. Our values and our principles DO NOT ALLOW FOR THAT HERE. It is not unfortunate that we must wait until a crime is being perpetrated, it is a necessity. Unless the Fourth Amendment is Primal, it is worthless. Does it MEAN what it SAYS?
    This is NOT a Libertarian point of view, it IS a Conservative point of view, in the way that the term “Conservative” is used today. This is a point of principle, and is basic to the return to Constitutional Values.
    Yes, there ARE ramifications to this principle. People MUST be able to exercise their Second Amendment rights in support of the Fourth Amendment MOVING the point of action from the tyrannical prevention of a crime by trading on individual rights, over to the RESPONSE to a crime as it happens. These are almost algebraic ramifications. If you remove rights (2A) on one side of the equation, then you have to remove rights on the other side of the equation (4A).
    Our Founding Fathers and especially Uncle Ben Franklin would agree: We cannot put up with even the smallest infringement upon our God Given rights, without throwing the baby away with the bathwater.
    How you can propose this point of view in a digest for Personal Liberty is incredible. The first clue is that if you agree with Bloomberg on ANYTHING, you must immediately check yourself. The next thing you know, you’ll be agreeing with Jackson and Sharpton. Strike one, personal Liberty Digest. Get your principles in line or this Conservative will dump you out like bathwater.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      If the Second Amendment was respected, then respecting the Fourth Amendment would not cause an increase in crime.
      More Guns, Less Crime:
      http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493636

      • rbrooks

        the author you present in your link, does not respect the 2nd amendment.

        he defends the current restrictions to the 2nd amendment.
        he is a good fit for this site, and your, definition of personal liberty.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Since you have no credibility on this board, Flashman, you’re going to need to post some evidence for your claim.

      • medbob

        As I said, the relationship is almost algebraic.

  • independent thinker

    If I remember correctly 10% or less of all the stops resulted in the cops finding any weapons especially guns and if I remember correctly “getting illegal guns off the street” was the original stated purpose of the stop-and-frisk.

    • vicki

      If I remember correctly, let’s check,
      “….the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed.” http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

      Yep. It is not possible to have illegal guns on the street so they are just wasting time and resources.

      • independent thinker

        Put a sock in it Vicki my comment neither supported or opposed the stop and frisk it merely stated the original reason for it as best I recall. Hopefully someone can provide references either supporting what I said or refuting it. I would look but must take care of some business and will be off line for most of the afternoon.

        • vicki

          And my comment did not negatively address your comment at all. It merely observed that illegal guns is an oxymoron. I may not have phrased it well and I apologize for that.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Don’t apologize, Vicki, you said nothing wrong. Independent Thinker is just being overly sensitive.

    • Virgil Lipinski

      The real intention of the law was to get guns off the street by deterrence more than anything else, and they did not care if Constitutional rights were violated. So, they have gotten guns off the street, but not by recovering them.

  • Tom Wolff

    Chip. WTF, dude?
    As many have said, and I’ll reiterate, just to add to the negative responses you’re getting:
    THIS IS ILLEGAL!

    I think someone should take your keyboard away for a year while you go read up on the Constitution, BOR, and liberty in general.

    You bring shame and dishonor upon this usually decent site.

  • justsayin

    Stop and Frisk is Illegal by every definition. No matter how much good they say it does or actually does.

    • vicki

      Quite the morning. Chip goes active statist and Dave and I agree on something. :)

      Ah ha. That was said by justsayin and not dave. Apparently discus has really screwed up the names.

      • WTS/JAY

        The “shill” in question goes by many a “monikers”; one for each of his personalities, it seems…(-:

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Do you wonder why the Leftists are crying foul over Stop and Frisk when it is them who implemented Stop and Frisk in the first place?

  • DalasKnight

    I don’t care who it “supposedly” protects, it is still unconstitutional and as a result, unlawful!! Not following common law is what has gotten us to where we are today in our society and going back to common law will be the only thing that will save our society; if that is possible and not too late!!

  • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

    Ex-O’homoBama lover and official Kal Penn blasted for ‘stop and frisk’ support
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/15/kal-penn-faces-backlash-stop-and-frisk-support/

    • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

      Of cause you aren’t like me. You are a STUPID joke. If you, Karolyn, would be me you would not be so dumbed and IGNORANTLY STUPID like you.

      He is NOT my president. He is a CHARLATAN and USURPER.

      He is illegal pRESIDENT and International Kriminal.

      A Member of the Irish Parliament awards “Hypocrite of the
      Century” and the “War Kriminal” to the Kenyan Kriminal
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SX58vqcEU0

      This is a message to the Kenyan FRAUD from Egyptian People:
      “obama, leave us alone … Leave Egypt alone. And STOP supporting the terrorists” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sInoCZ3RHLs

      Only STUPID IDIOTS like you will continue to warship the CEO of Satanic guild.

      • smilee

        Legally he is your president if you are a US citizen, you do not have to like it but you are powerless to do anything about it but bitch.

  • the gul

    Chip you are an incredible racist. You have no business writing for personal liberty

    • WTS/JAY

      Better hurry, or you’ll be late for your Klan meeting, Dave.

  • chipwoodpl

    Readers!

    Those of you who are excoriating me for the position I took in this column are correct. Upon reflection, I blew this one. I made a knee-jerk reaction to a judge’s ruling without considering the 4th Amendment consequences. I will revisit this issue in my column next week.

    Until then, keep some powder dry.

    Chip

    • Virgil Lipinski

      I live in NYC & feel this program has gone way out of line, but the judge did not rule on the evidence of the 19 stops…her reasoning is ludicrous, too, so don’t be too hard on yourself… Bottom line: No one should ever be stopped unless there is a good reason, case closed!

      It takes a highly evolved soul to admit they were wrong! God Bless you!

    • Karolyn

      Good call Chip! :-)

    • JeffH

      Chip, thank you for being the bigger man by admitting your err and clarifying my confusion over your article.

    • Patriot_Dave

      Thank You Chip… Now that’s a great example of the common courtesy I was referring to!!!

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Wow. I’m impressed. Not many people will own up to their errors.
      Thanks, Chip.

    • DavidForward

      It takes an honest man (or woman) to admit they may have made a mistake and reevaluate their position. Congratulations on proving you are such individual! Personal integrity and common sense are sorely missed in our devolving police state; keep up the good work, honest thoughts and evaluations.

    • vicki

      Thank you Chip. We were wondering cause you have always been a staunch supporter of individual liberty for all. Not just for liberals or conservatives etc..

    • Dave

      Remember Chip,
      Conservative propaganda must stay constant for it to work… you, in this article let people know the truth… can’t have that here.

      • WTS/JAY

        Don’t you have a business to run, mamma’s boy?

        • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

          Do NOT worry about his business. His wife runs it successfully on behalf with Illegal pRESIDENT. Full security is provided.
          http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/81053599/

          Dave aka Mark has a special treatment from his master.

          • Dave

            Traitor talk and ad hominem attacks from Alondra.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            I love you too “Dave”, even you are Liberal.

            Just please, “Seek the Lord while He may be found, Call upon Him while He is near.” (Isaiah 55:6)

            May God bless you and give you a WISDOM.

          • Dave

            I have the wistom, that is why I don’t believe in man-made organized religions like Christianity, Judaism and islam.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Yes, you have the “wistom” but not the “WISDOM”.
            Neither I believe in religion. I believe in God.

          • Dave

            I believe in the possibility that god exists as I do the possibility that god doesn’t exist. You believe in the Christian version of god.

    • WTS/JAY

      Two thumbs up, Chip!!

  • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

    RACIST and HYPOCRITE Dave aka Mark,

    Former Florida Rep. Allen West had some harsh words for “civil rights” activists the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton, who have remained silent on a video showing BLACK teens beating a WHITE boy on a school bus.

    “Three 15-year-old BLACK teens beat up a 13-year-old WHITE kid because he told school officials they tried to sell him drugs,” Mr. West said, earlier this week …

    “Do you hear anything from Sharpton, Jackson, NAACP. Stevie Wonder, Jay-Z, liberal media or Hollywood? Cat got your tongues, or is it that pathetic hypocrisy revealing itself once again? Ya’ll just make me sick.”

    Breitbart News caught up with Mr. Jackson at Chicago’s annual Bud Billiken Back-to-School Parade on Saturday to let him explain why he chose to fight for justice for Trayvon Martin and not the boy who was beaten.

    “It’s hard to make a comparison,” he told Breitbart.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/12/jesse-jackson-white-boy-bus-beating-its-hard-make-/

    Dave / Mark, no thanks needed.

  • Jimmy the Greek

    I live in Texas and that kind of crap don’t happen in houston , I have never seen the cops stop someone of any shade of skin just to serch them for no good reason , however , When i lived in N.J. in the early 70s the cops would stop there cars and serch my white butt a lot for no good reason , I think it is a north eastern thing . no one should have to worry about cops stoping them walking down the sidewalk and diging in there things for any reason !

    • Karolyn

      Maybe not where you live in Texas, but there are plenty of stories on the net of cops going way overboard in Texas. Texans are not as free as they say they are!

      • KG

        Just ask the wetbacks…ummm….or the Injuns. And that state sponsored terrorist network – The Texas Rangers. Oh, and poor white trash as well. Wouldn’t want to be polluting the gene pool with undesirables.

        • Jimmy the Greek

          there needs to be open season on the wet’s they have no rights !

      • TheOriginalDaveH

        Not at all. I was at a fair there, and there was a display put on by the police which was demonstrating what kinds of weapons were illegal (switchblades, brass knuckles, etc.). And the people I knew there abhorred Libertarian concepts.

        • Karolyn

          Really? Wow, that’s not what so many would have people believe. I’m always hearing that “Don’t mess with Texas” stuff. Even here people post about how Texas values individual liberty.

      • Jimmy the Greek

        If your not a dope fien , you don’t have to much trouble in texas

        • Karolyn

          That’s not what I see in news reports online all the time. A disproportionate number of cops going to the wrong house, shooting people and their dogs happens in Texas.

          • Jimmy the Greek

            That is all over Meth , the dope fens are the ones that bring that down on people , What i do every day here in texas , would put me in prison in jersey ( carry a pistol in my car ) that is leagel in texas , however some times i carry it on my person , that you would need a permit for and i never went down and got one , even that is not a felony , its about like getting poped with a bag of weed , mots people that end up in jail in texas end up there because they are stuped ,

    • ThomasThePaine
      • TheOriginalDaveH

        Sickening. They are no better than rapists. What kind of mindset does it take for somebody to be like that? Psychos of the highest order.

        • ThomasThePaine

          Who else do you think wants to become a cop?
          I’ve been a gunsmith for 50 years. So, I deal with with lots of cops. . . Most of them are homicidal maniac wannabes.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            I’ve only known 3 personally, and only 1 of those 3 was a decent man.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Re: Police Searches – You have to know your right to say no to the Police unlawful Search
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua-qT99vvTs

            3 Savvy Ways to keep from getting Arrested
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIll9PGSCGE

          • ThomasThePaine

            Absolutely.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            I am sorry that you think of cops this way. I still think they are our last line of defense before chaos. Watchmen, what of the night.

          • ThomasThePaine

            There is a difference between “thinking” and “knowing”. I have more than my share in my own family. . . Trust me: I “konw”!

          • vicki

            Nad. WE are the watchmen. And it is way past time we stop delegating that task.

        • Guest

          .

        • Jimmy the Greek

          Well good let them keep doing that LOL

      • Jimmy the Greek

        There buts well get in all sorts of trouble over that !

        • ThomasThePaine

          No, they will not: Their superiors and their union always back them up. The only reason that they are so “out of control”, is because the government wants them to be that way!

          • Jimmy the Greek

            Your right on that one , but then tell me how come i get away with so much crap that i do here in Texas, Every thing from street racing , rasing all sorts of hell that would have gotten my arse in prison if i was still living in jersey .

          • ThomasThePaine

            They are probably too busy killing dogs on raids to wrong addresses. . . http://www.policestateusa.com/archives/207

          • Jimmy the Greek

            to tell you the truth a lot of cops lose there jobs here in texas , because they dont pay well execpt in the biger citys so there hire what they can get ,

  • scott miller

    If you would not support random stops for yourself and your loved ones and friends. then you cannot in good faith at all say its is ok because someones skin color is different.

    you want to stop crime in poor neighborhoods? provide good paying jobs. stop the drug war, take the money out of the drug trade and get work into the places and then you would see a marked decrease in crime since most crime is in fact drug crime, which is wholly about the billions in dollars in drug trade. and white folks have more than their fair share of drugs to go around.

    • The Duke of New York

      You got it wrong, buddy…I live in NYC..It is not about skin color, it is about stopping violent crime, PERIOD! Since over 90% of violent crimes are committed by minorities (and over 90% of those are against their own people), that is where the police go to implement stop& frisk…having said that, you can’t just search millions of people without just cause, it is simply Unconstitutional! Bloomberg is a loony gasbag!

      • scott miller

        And i would wager a good chunk of that crime is due to drug terf wars, when you have all that money up for grabs people want it.

        • The Duke of New York

          I”m not going to disagree & you make a lot of sense in your earlier post, I’m just saying this issue is NOT at all about race. The mayor & NYPD just want to get reduce crime & murders & to them the ends justify the means & let me tell you there are LOADS of people in these neighborhoods who are all for it, since they feel a lot safer! Hey, when bullets are flying like the Wild West, you can give up constitutional protections in a hurry! Do I agree? NO!

          The judge was a moron in her decision, For example in a district that is 92% black let’s say & 99% of the violent crime is committed by blacks, even in district like this, at least 40% of the stops have to be of whites or hispanics for a fair rendering of the program. It’s INSANE!!

          • Robert Messmer

            Wait you said “bullets are flying like the Wild West,” how can that be? I thought it all but impossible to own a gun in NYC so if no one owns a gun (except for the police?) who is doing all that shooting? Have the Canadians decided to invade?

          • vicki

            Since only the Police have guns it must be them. Probably shouldn’t let them have guns either.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        But Bloomberg has no intention of stopping crime, what would all the Leftist Lawyers, the civil rights busybodies and sobsisters aka social workers do for jobs if crime is stopped. Dung beetles need elephant crap to survive likewise all the city workers need crime to survive on.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Excellent point, Nad.
          Crime is Big Money to Big Government. They have a vested interest in NOT controlling crime.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      it’s funny but all of those things have been tried in NYC by all the Leftists and busybodies of all colors and religious persuasions since I was a kid but that has not stopped certain areas of the city from being crime infested and migrating to new territories for predation.
      Now the “stop and frisk” ploys did not come into existence because of Conservatives or Libertarians, it is the Leftists who brought it about and it is the Leftists who are decrying their own choices. it is also a Leftist judge which wants to halt the “stop and frisk”. Anything the Leftists come up with to stop crime always ends up hurting the wrong people.

    • JRJ21

      In the American depression,jobs were scare and crime was low.Poverty does NOT CAUSE CRIME.Who is to provide “good paying jobs”Clean your lives up,pull up your pants and get a clue what a business looks for in an employee.”White folks” don’t force drugs down your damn throats.You follow race baiting “leaders”who are ruining you and your generation.

    • spartacus

      head up your ? scott !

      • scott miller

        No its not ty, i believe in the protection from search and seizure without due cause.

        Its one of the things we went to war with the brits over…….

        Those that would give up a bit of freedom for a measure of security deserve neither. To steal a phrase. ]

        Far as jobs go, get the government out of it, deregulate, lower taxes, kill the irs, get a flat tax, legalize drugs, encourage community level action, put real honest cops on the streets, we can go from there.

        We do not need cops pulling people over at whim period, that is not america.

        No noone pours drugs down american throats, cept the prescription drug industry, the alcohol industry, the otc drug industry, so on and so on, we are nation run on drugs.

        We are a “free” nation with massive open borders, you create a black market in that kind of nation by outlawing something it creates crime. period. Trillions of dollars to be had in the global drug market, alot of it tax free.

        Go study prohibition and see what banning something people want does. Nevermind that it turns otherwise law abiding citizens into criminals. And the health vs legal debate because some drugs are a disease, just locking someone up is not going to get them off smack.

        And for the record i am a white male. So i am a white folk :P.

  • Jeff

    The problem may not be the policy but its implementation. “Terry” stops are permitted where a police officer has a “reasonable suspicion” a person may have a weapon and may be about to commit a crime. The officer may pat the person down for weapons (not a joint). The New York policy appears to have allowed inexperienced officers to substitute race and age for “reasonable suspicion” in making such stops. When college students and City officials have been stopped a dozen or more times merely for Walking While Black, that is a perversion of even the most “liberal” interpretation one can give the police’s powers under the 4th Amendment.

    If the New York policy is so effective, why are virtually all the people they harass and stop not even charged with anything? This policy, or certainly its implementation, has a corrosive effect on community relations so when the police are looking for a legitimate bad guy, his neighbors are less likely to deal with the police. I don’t see how increased training or modifying a policy resulting in the waste of time of stopping thousands of people for no reason can possibly be giving a “free pass” to murderers.

  • The Phone Guy

    The road to hell is paved with good intentions! Lock ‘em all up, Bloomy says!

  • ibn insha

    You can have zero crimes if you frisk and search every body as soon as they step out of their homes. Problem solved.

    Constitution does not allow searching a person without a probable cause and for good reason. Just because a person belongs to a group who’s members commit most of the crimes does not mean he should be searched. Every liberty comes with certain risks. If you don’t want to take risk then you have to give up liberty. Throw the constitution where it cannot be found again.

    There are many reasons for crimes and one of the reason is government’s denial of the people’s right to protect themselves by guns. A lot of crimes would never occur if criminals know that they might end up looking down the wrong end of a gun barrel.

  • WTS/JAY

    OUTGOING IRS CHIEF: TAXES VOLUNTARY…by WILLIAM BIGELOW 18 May 2013: IRS SCANDAL

    On Friday, former acting IRS Commissioner Steve Miller, testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee, said that America’s tax system is “voluntary.”

    During the hearing, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) said in passing that the U.S. tax code is a “voluntary system.” Miller simply responded, “Agreed.”

    This line has been used before by none other than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Interviewed by Jan Helfeld in 2008, this is how the conversation went:

    Helfeld: If the government is in the business of forcefully taking money from some people in order to provide welfare benefits to others, how will the people whose money is being taken feel about the government?

    Reid: Well, I don’t accept your phraseology. I don’t think we force people-

    Helfeld: Taxation is not forceful?

    Reid: Well, no ..

    Helfeld: It’s voluntary?

    Reid: Quite the contrary. Our system of government Is a voluntary tax system

    Helfeld: If you don’t want to pay your taxes, you don’t have to?

    Reid: Of course you have to pay your taxes

    Helfeld: The government will force you to pay or they will fine you or imprison you.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/17/IRS-Chief-Taxes-Are-Voluntary

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      They’ve been making that lame claim of “voluntary” taxes ever since I can remember.
      Jay, you should read this one:
      http://www.voluntarytax.info/

      There is one overriding concern, though. As I continually say, Government is the Biggest Gang in the land. So don’t expect them to behave as anything other than that.

      • WTS/JAY

        Wow, superb article, DaveH!!! TY for bringing it to my attention. I shall save it and study it some more! (-:

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Listen to this load, Jay:
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7mRSI8yWwg

          This guy thinks the American people are dumber than dirt. He sounds just like the word-twisting Progressives that comment on here.

          • WTS/JAY

            Yes, it’s called “double-speak”, or as we used to call it in the old days, just plain “lying”! Fortunately for them, the only thing that ensures and keeps them in their positions of power, from which they continue the “pilfering” by force, is ignorance; that being, the ignorant masses. Anyone with even one, functioning brain-cell, can see that paying taxes is not voluntary, but are in fact, extracted by force; whether they be withheld, or otherwise. Clearly, Reid is lying through his teeth. Which is to say, he does not represent himself very well, the Mormon community, included. One would think that his brothers and sisters would have something to say regarding his deplorable-behaviour…?

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Just amazing. What a twisted two-cell liberal brain.

            Why they hate Rush?. Because he confronts them.
            Rush Limbaugh urging Harry Reid to face him like a man
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5IjfIdVBR0

          • WTS/JAY

            I think Rush may have overestimated Reid, since Reid is obviously not a man, but a scoundrel! Even Rush doesn’t get it right, at times. (-:

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Respectfully disagree. Rush once again proved that harry is not “man” and NEVER was.

            Just a filthy self-serving politician.

  • WTS/JAY

    Obama says YES for FEMA imprisonment of US citizens!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrqnu2Jxnec

  • Scott

    The stop and frisk programs are unconstitutional. 4th amendment applies to persons as well as property, when it comes to searches without a warrant, and reporting on the successes does not negate the constitutional violations of the many. Rights not to be felt up by government operatives are good rights to have.

    • vicki

      Too bad you don’t have those rights in airports any longer.

  • Motov

    At first I was thinking 4th amendment, and yes unconstitutional, as I read further (correct me if I am wrong) these cases are after a crime has been committed, description of the suspects has been given, and the police are picking up suspects who fit the description, and frisking them,.. sounds like standard procedure to me.
    Or the situation of the guy trying out a bunch of keys on a door would be suspicious in an area where many burglaries have happened.
    I wonder if “suspicious behavior” means patrolling a high crime area, and when someone sees a cop, he decides to run emptying his pockets as he goes.
    Or he ignores the cop because he knows he has done nothing wrong. and continues about his business.
    The former I can say “probable cause”, the latter 4th amendment violation if stopped and frisked.

    • Motov

      I just read the author’s note, I felt he was hinting at information that was omitted like the examples I used. I mis-read the article. I strongly believe in the 4th amendment, I also believe in common sense like the examples I stated.