did orwell have a point ? - Page 3

Ianto.W. · 08-08-2007, 01:55

I do not think we have any choice in the matter, what the 'powers' that be want us they usually get. I have not read any of Orwells works in any depth, but I have allways admired forward thinkers of like him and H G wells, Where did they get the inspiration to write these book's?. Most of what has come to pass.

beechy · 08-08-2007, 05:38

i believe we would sit back and accept
anything and everything that any ministerial government
assured us was for our benefit
like lambs to the slaughter

cashman · 08-08-2007, 13:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by beechy

i believe we would sit back and accept
anything and everything that any ministerial government
assured us was for our benefit
like lambs to the slaughter

agree many would,cashy accepts buggar all he dont agree with though.

churchfcrules · 08-08-2007, 13:37

i agree that anything the government wanted to do we would just allow them to steamroller over us, but my original point i was trying to get accross, was would we happily trade some of our "freedoms" for the irradication of crime, or is the price of that same freedom the crime rate that we have to endure today? and if so is it worth it?

cashman · 08-08-2007, 13:42

would trade some freedoms, AFTER they reviewed the sentencing and made it more to fit the crime,cos until that is done its pointless loosing any more of our freedoms.

beechy · 08-08-2007, 13:50

there aint going to be any trading
when the ministry decides
we will go along
dont make any difference if we are happy about
it or not

Eric · 09-08-2007, 21:27

Give up freedoms for the promise of a crime free state ... I don't think so. Give up something millions have died for for a piece of Pie in the Sky ... or to put it another way: selling your birthright for a mess of pottage. I think that your American cousins are way ahead of you guys on this one. Many Americans, particularly the ones in power, would like to see the end of the ACLU, but they are a great conscience. Sure people could argue that safeguards will be in place, but who guards the guardians?

churchfcrules · 09-08-2007, 22:44

evryone has made valid points, but what i am saying is, IF crime WAS irradicated, would you see it as a fair swap, not the whole "they only do it it for ulteria motives" thing

LancYorkYankee · 10-08-2007, 02:52

First, no matter what you do, crime will never be erradicated. There will always be evil folks who perpetrate their ways.

Second, my dear Eric, if you love the ACLU so much, please take them off our hands. The US would be a MUCH better nation without the left-leaning liberal crap they attempt to constantly force feed down our thoats. Our founding Fathers wouldn't have put up with an inkling of the way they misread and misrepresent our Constitution. What a huge bunch of disgusting maggots! (oh . . . to quantify . . . IMHO)

Brian

SPUGGIE J · 10-08-2007, 03:21

Eventually there will be a form of living akin to Mega City 1 in the 2000 AD comic with Judge Dredd style police dispencing instant justice. Then there will be complaints galore but as we seem to be weak kneed when it comes to crime this is a possibility for the future.

Eric · 13-08-2007, 00:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by LancYorkYankee

First, no matter what you do, crime will never be erradicated. There will always be evil folks who perpetrate their ways.

Second, my dear Eric, if you love the ACLU so much, please take them off our hands. The US would be a MUCH better nation without the left-leaning liberal crap they attempt to constantly force feed down our thoats. Our founding Fathers wouldn't have put up with an inkling of the way they misread and misrepresent our Constitution. What a huge bunch of disgusting maggots! (oh . . . to quantify . . . IMHO)

Brian

I don't love them, nor agree with all they do, but I do think that some such group is necessary. As your Supreme Court shows, and the cases brought before it, there are different ways of reading the constitution. In the decision it brought down on the abortion issue (Roe vs Wade???) their interpretation of the 14th and the 9th ammendments would not be accepted by even a mild right to lifer. And I do remember that some southerners who killed blacks and were acquitted by all white juries, were later tried, not for murder, but for violating the civil rights or their victims. And I do hope that you are not suggesting that your reading of the constitution is right, and that the reading of a group whom you do not support is wrong. I think that I mentioned somewhere else that right wing Americans, some of them anyway, would be prepared to toss out the first ammendment in order to prevent people from burning the flag!