“The rights enumerated in this Bill of Rights shall not be construed to limit other rights of the people not therein expressed.”

oops, I guess that eliminates compelled compliance, license, victimless crimes, governmental larceny, etc.

Agree Mike, some mighty big oops you've listed here.

Don't we all breathe a little easier when Congress is in recess instead of busy passing more laws that take away more rights.

Mikes big oops are nonsense to me. He never explains what he means. Law without compulsion is nonexistent. If we are going to have law without compulsion then we might just as well disband all governement everywhere existing.

Government is in place to protect your rights, not grant them. Law should be about moral restraint and not about making you do something you would otherwise not do. But that isn't the system we've evolved to is it? We've evolved to a nanny/welfare state where government controls almost you're every move...and its only getting worse.

Waffler, I've explained ad nauseam what I've meant. I've even explained the difference between law and codes, ordinances, regulations, rules, and statutes. I've shown how the re-definition of words and concepts have diminished or eliminated freedom and liberty. I've explained how man's unlawful / unconstitutional government is creating and enforcing tyranny and despotism. And, you have been consistently clear on the subject; all of that is nonsense to you because you believe that everyone should be happy as a slave, there being no greater bliss than to be told what to do by the mob.

Mike, your retort is to black and white. I am not a slave and neither are my friends. Where do you get this kind of understanding? Corporations, the FED, greedy politicians, the banks, corrupt government, campaign financing; these are the elements that have made us slaves to the system, not government. Government is just a tool for those who can manipulate it, for those who can have power provided by corporate America. Government is just a means to govern, its us that cause tyranny and despotism - we put them into government and turn around and say Oh its governments fault and they are the criminals. Let’s all be more responsible for our own actions and those actions to date have been greed and fake security that finances our war machine. Waffler is not saying people should be happy as slave you are - I do not reach that conclusion from his remarks. The conclusion I feel from reading your remarks is that you are uncaring for those who are unable to care for themselves and the roads, hospitals, utilities, schools, should miraculously be provided by local communities and charities - that my dear friend takes us back to feudalism and tribes.

It isn't that libertarians do not care, we simply see a better, more just way to accomplish those ends. For some information on that aspect, I would highly recommend "Healing Our World." http://www.ruwart.com/Healing/ruwart_all.html There is a semantics problem with government as well. The problem isn't "government," but who has the right to govern and what rights and privileges should those who govern have. The most just system is one where everyone's equal negative rights are respected and reactively defended. It is when those who govern grant privilege to one group by violating the rights of others, (like the examples you cited - Corporations, the FED, greedy politicians, the banks, corrupt government, campaign financing, etc...), that the problems manifest themselves. As an individual I have no right to steal, even if you're well off and my intentions are to give the plunder to someone in need, but for some reason we seem to believe that if I'm elected to public office, I suddenly have that right. As an individual, I cannot compel you to sell your possessions for a certain price, certain quantities or qualities, but give me the power of the State and we call it regulation. I can't print currency, but the FRB can. I can't grant corporations legal monopolies, but your congressmen can. As for campaign finance, the problem isn't who can give or how much, but what politicians have to "sell" to their donors. If we bring politicians' rights back down to a level field with the rest of us and limit their actions so that granting privilege by violating the rights of others is treated as the criminal offense that it is when one of us does it, those in government would have nothing to sell and lobby groups would have no incentive buy.

Bryan, well said. Robert, WHAT??? Robert, is it corporations, the FED, or corrupt government that is compelling day to day activities in your's and mine lives, declaring that it possess all rights aloof from We The People that it may license at its prejudice, at its whim (contrary to inalienable individual right - no need to vote on it) establish any harmless activity to be a crime, or authorize larceny with impunity? It is true that large corporations are morphing into quasi-governmental agencies but, it is still under the auspices of government that tyranny and despotism are pursuing greater and greater omnipotence / omnipresence. Robert, you've obviously not read what I do on a weekly basis. Any time you want you can join me in the kitchen helping to feed those less fortunate than me. You can join me any time you feel to build a home for someone less fortunate than me. You can join me in any natural disaster relief I am participating in. And I can only imagine that my financial contributions to charity will exceed both yours and Wafflers combined. Roads, hospitals, utilities, etc. are paid by use; schools are paid propaganda training grounds where just enough is taught to fill the minds of the students with that which will ultimately destroy society.

Lots of words guys lots of words. My only complaint against Mike is his words make no sense. Government and law maybe be in effect one and the same thing. We (The People) govern ourselves by passing laws or other conventions concerning the correct way to behave when interacting with society or in public. Thus traffic laws for starters. Mike complains of "compelled compliance" well all I ask is for Mike to stop from being so f****** hard heeaded and down right stupid and to admit that law that is not compelled upon us is no law at all. And a society without law and compelled compliance is no society at all. Now the overwhelming job of "government" is probably to insure compliance. The more folk that go along with the law the less "government" or oversight that would be required. A utopia of peace and cooperation. All I ask is why does Mike keep talking about COMPELLED COMPLIANCE, what the hell is he ever talking about.

Waffler, lol, I'm laughing hysterically while shaking my head. Man's government and law are not one. Man is not God (what ever that is to you), so he can not create law(s), he can only create codes, ordinances, regulations, rules, statutes, etc. either in harmony with or at odds to the law of nature or nature's God. That is a concept that only a slave at heart and mind could not understand. Only a tyrannical and despotic theocracy of men (as is averse to a government of law) believe they can create law and then morally compel compliance thereof. Waffler, man made edicts that are compelled upon us are not law, they are criminal activities.

Bryan, I agree well said. ----"If we bring politicians' rights back down to a level field with the rest of us and limit their actions so that granting privilege by violating the rights of others is treated as the criminal offense that it is when one of us does it, those in government would have nothing to sell and lobby groups would have no incentive buy."-----To do this all it would take is to start punishing those who corrupt the government tool because they violated their oaths of office.

You are a nut Mike, pure and simple. Welcome to the world of Archer.

RBESRQ-----------In your assumption that those that believe the way we do "are uncaring for those who are unable to care for themselves and the roads, hospitals, utilities, schools, should miraculously be provided by local communities and charities", will soon be a moot issue anyway because the loss of individual rights naturally deprives man of the tools necessary for self survival leading to dependent survival on whatever government that is and its collective idea of what is best for your survival thus for your life. Without these rights, if an individual cannot responsibly take care of himself and it's true one has to help himself before he can help others where does anyone get off telling those who are losing the means to take care of themselves they do not care for others when they are falling into the same boat of dependence more and more Americans are boarding every single day?

Waffler, the governments (especially local) like to make tons of laws then enforce them selectively. This gives them dictatorial control over whomever they do not like. Believe me there are so many little seemingly insignificant laws and regulations that any one could be under constant harassment by anyone that uses the power of the state as a weapon.

Mike, you too have no idea what I do and I'm not going to start a tit for tat - lets just say you are wrong in your assumption - And I don't care if Waffler can't match your generosity, I have enough for the two of us. Warren, who do you think tells the government what to do definitely not the government? The pernicious of all government entities are local governments because they don't have the funding big government has.

Big government is totally useless as is being shown in Obama's "A change you can believe in" he just toes the line of his bosses.

In other words, we have more rights than those enumerated, and it is not to be confused with a grant of rights in the first place but merely the specific limitations of the government to abridge the rights enumerated. Mike, jim, Carlton say it quite clearly. The libs seem to be struggling here...