Oath Keepers!!

[dnf777]

[QUOTE=TXduckdog;514731]You know, folks always lump all this stuff together without ever breaking down the reason and background for such actions. Most of which are restricted for use in cases involving national security and the war on terrorists.

Please explain how a 70 year old double-war veteran wearing an antiwar t-shirt at a presidential speech poses a threat to our national security???

The actual crime he was arrested (detained) for was failing to comply with law enforcement who was trying to herd him into a cordoned off "free speech zone" that was out of camera view.

As convenient as it may be to lump all these assaults on our God-given rights into a ball of "national security" and sweep it under the rug, I will not give up my rights so easily.

Was it Ben Franklin who said, "those who would trade liberty for security, deserve neither!" ?

[TXduckdog]

[QUOTE=dnf777;514750]

You know, folks always lump all this stuff together without ever breaking down the reason and background for such actions. Most of which are restricted for use in cases involving national security and the war on terrorists.

Please explain how a 70 year old double-war veteran wearing an antiwar t-shirt at a presidential speech poses a threat to our national security???

The actual crime he was arrested (detained) for was failing to comply with law enforcement who was trying to herd him into a cordoned off "free speech zone" that was out of camera view.

As convenient as it may be to lump all these assaults on our God-given rights into a ball of "national security" and sweep it under the rug, I will not give up my rights so easily.

Was it Ben Franklin who said, "those who would trade liberty for security, deserve neither!" ?

Like I said...MOST OF WHICH ARE RESTRICTED.....I didn't say all.

I happen to agree with you on this situation....I think the "Free Speech zone" is kind of silly......but the dude did fail to comply with LE and that will always get you busted.

I won't surrender my rights without a fight either....thats why groups like this one have sprung up. But you do need to consider that security issues are what they are and will always involve some level of compromise on individual liberties. But I have yet to see the 'average joe's' liberties being violated on a trend basis. Isolated cases, yes...as a whole, no.

I think you and I agree a lot more than we think we do.

[dnf777]

[QUOTE=TXduckdog;514783]

I think you and I agree a lot more than we think we do.

I bet you're right. It's more fun to slap-box than to pat each other on the back though, isn't it? I suspect that's why there's a POTUS room. Hell, I think even Hew and I agreed once or twice. (probably didn't admit it, though)

happy training,
dave