The Complete History of Tyranny in America 1815-Today

[carlfense]

The only reason laws have real world value, is because of enforcement and the threat of punishment.

Now there's some shaky logic. (Or circular logic depending on where you go with it . . .)

[Saunders]

The only reason laws have real world value, is because of enforcement and the threat of punishment.

Now there's some shaky logic. (Or circular logic depending on where you go with it . . .)

Shaky logic?

 

lol...

 

Would speed limits be effective if there weren't speeding tickets?

[carlfense]

Would speed limits be effective if there weren't speeding tickets?

Are they effective if there is a threat of speeding tickets?

[Someone]

Would speed limits be effective if occasionally, people sped and didn't get a ticket?

[Someone]

I didn't get a speeding ticket today therefore speed limits had absolutely no effect on my driving.

[Saunders]

Would speed limits be effective if there weren't speeding tickets?

Are they effective if there is a threat of speeding tickets?

Sure. But if tickets weren't handed out eventually (enforcing the law), people would ignore the laws.

[Saunders]

I didn't get a speeding ticket today therefore speed limits had absolutely no effect on my driving.

[Saunders]

Anyway, I'm done with this semantics argument that's derailed this thread.

[TGHusker]

Carl, not sure I follow your 1st statement. Federalism has always been in the Constitution - that I do agree. But states had greater power and freedom than you see today. Yes the Civil War was a huge federal/state issue. But you have to look beyond it. The issue of slavery should not have been allowed to continue under the constitution - esp in light of the bill of rights. However, it was the one compromise that the northern states agreed to in order to quaranty the ratification of the Constitution. If you remove that compromise and slavery was abolished in 1789 and all of the states had joined the union - then you would have had a total different view of Federal/State rights. As it is, the slavery issue had to be dealt with and with the dealing of it, the Federal govt became stronger and the states weaker. If the Constitutional Convention could have come up with a different solution than allowing slavery to continue - then the 10th Amendment would have maintain a stronger role in our system of gov't . The price of the 'compromise' was the civil war and long term, states rights. During the last 100 years, beginning with FDR we have seen more and more errosion of what should have been a balance between state and federal govts. Perhaps, with the population growth and the demands of a more modern global society, the ideal balance of power may have been difficult if not impossible to maintain.

Not much ambiguity here:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

agree - clear as sunshine now

[Someone]

Would speed limits be effective if there weren't speeding tickets?

Are they effective if there is a threat of speeding tickets?

Sure. But if tickets weren't handed out eventually (enforcing the law), people would ignore the laws.

Really?

 

So if people who drive a certain car--say a Scion xB or a Scion tC--are 4 times more likely to get a speeding ticket, people would ignore the laws?

 

What if we knew that FL, NV and GA are the best states to get a ticket while MT, WY and either ND or SD don't seem as quick to write a ticket. Would people ignore the law?

 

What if we know that you are 22 times more likely to get a a speeding ticket in San Ramon than in Berekely? Does that mean that people don't follow speed limit laws in Berekely CA?

[strigori]

You can't agrue that the POTUS will because tyrannical, it just hasn't happened with any credibility. We have 200 plus year of orderly transition of power. Most likely, you are not a murderer. There is no need to add YET to that statement. There is no history of a nation with our constitution becoming an evil empire. There is no need to add YET to that statement.

The US isn't a special snowflake.

I would beg to differ. There has never been a country set up like ours, and really there still isn't. Compare our Constitution with other nation's. Ours is binding law, which is certainly not typical, and much harder to change. Also note that pretty much every other democracy uses the British Parliamentary system, and not our three branch set up. there is a reason in this county was called "The Great Experiment" 200 years of orderly power transitions is pretty unique.

[Saunders]

Would speed limits be effective if there weren't speeding tickets?

Are they effective if there is a threat of speeding tickets?

Sure. But if tickets weren't handed out eventually (enforcing the law), people would ignore the laws.

Really?

 

So if people who drive a certain car--say a Scion xB or a Scion tC--are 4 times more likely to get a speeding ticket, people would ignore the laws?

 

What if we knew that FL, NV and GA are the best states to get a ticket while MT, WY and either ND or SD don't seem as quick to write a ticket. Would people ignore the law?

 

What if we know that you are 22 times more likely to get a a speeding ticket in San Ramon than in Berekely? Does that mean that people don't follow speed limit laws in Berekely CA?