Rep Chabot’s Police State Tactic; the One Party Template

 

I’ll have some comments later, but I hope the folks over at ProgressOhio, where this video is posted, realize this is the template they helped create right along with the neocons.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Government, Liberty, Virtue and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Rep Chabot’s Police State Tactic; the One Party Template

  1. Wayne Herrod says:

    This is the beginning of the Police state where we are routinely spied upon, told where we can protest and record our “rights to publicly assemble for the purposes of pettioning our elected officials for redress of grievances” expressed as natural “common law” already existing and implied with our existence within the 1st amendemnt of our constitution!

    We have put up with this crap too long, government exists for the benefit of We, the Citizens, not somke elitist rabble with jackbooted thugs protecting them as some sort of royalty. Did we not once throw off the chains of a monarchy some 235 years ago, only to voluntarilly surrender to another? As Thomas Jefferson so elegantly stated, :we only have those rights we are willing to fight for and as Patrick Henry oppined, I know what course others may take, but as for me- Give me Liberty, or give me death! Mountani Semper Liberi.

  2. It’s like I always say…
    You can’t be a little bit constitution just like you can’t be a little bit pregnant.
    Too many people claim to love the constitution until they find that it may effect their issue and their ability to step on someone else’s liberty. It’s OK to control what “they” do, but just don’t come telling “me” how to run my life. That’s not how liberty works.
    The constitution is a contract with government to guarantee indiviual liberty above all else.
    We The People as a group must always stand for each other’s individual freedom’s.

  3. MC333 says:

    These people should file Title 42 USC Section 1983 federal actions against the policeman. I feel bad for the policeman to a degree – but he broke the law just like anyone else and should be held liable for his offense. Under section 1983 a government employee is personally liable in a civil suit. Here the damages may be small, but an injunction might be obtained against the district preventing this from happening again. This could also give policemen authority to repudiate orders along these lines in the future.

Comments are closed.