• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the government really that intrusive?

Even if people die before a regulation occurs, the regulation is over an entire industry while a court decision is only over a specific instance or maybe a whole company. World of difference.

That is not true. Court cases can be about an entire industry, multiple companies or one company, just like government regulations. Just because most regulations are about an entire industry and most court decisions are about one company doesn't mean that either have that limit on them.
 
I sincerely doubt the government has enough employees with enough free time to monitor every single citizen in america.

Honestly, Hoplite I generally agree with you. It's a bit ridiculous to whine "I have to recycle! THIS IS FASCISM!" But especially nowadays, there are always going to be complaining about it.

I guess they've never been in a situation where the government was a good thing? Hell, I've had my life saved by the police force before, I sure as hell don't complain that they want to put up traffic cameras so they can catch the idiots doing 80 MPH in a school zone.

Essentially, I only have to pay taxes once a year, an amount which isn't HUGE, and in return I get well policed roads, public libraries, well regulated food that I know is safe to eat, nice public parks and wilderness trails, quality public education, a way of resolving disputes with others or of protecting myself from fraud, and just an overall sense of safety and security.

Man, that government, what'd it ever do for me.

Those cameras helped catch the would be Times Square Bomber...
 
Government surveillance cameras are intrusive. Traffic, stop-light, downtown, wherever.


I don't live in the ****ing city. I live in the county. I'm not talking about an apartment building, I'm talking about a storage shed for my own personal use.

The government is telling me I have to sort through my trash. I consider that tinhorn petty BS. Also I consider some of the penalties for not complying to be overly harsh. In NC, if you throw anything but an aluminum can in an AL recycling bin, you can go to jail. That's ridiculous.

Don't bet your ass. I work for the power company and trust me, the gov is really pushy about all these bird protection acts. There was a story not long ago about some teenager who got arrested for having hawk feathers in his possession.

Correction. In one state, in the glovebox is fine. In the next state, in the glovebox can get me arrested. That sucks. Also it is STUPID, the dashboard is no damn place to put a gun, it's likely to slide off during a turn. Then again lots of NC laws are abysmally stupid and statist. Main reason I don't live there.

I don't ask for society's help. Mostly I just ask that it leave me the hell alone.

You're young. You don't remember what it was like 30 and 40 years ago, or longer, when we didn't have half of this ****. You're too young to realize how much ground we've lost.

I'm not saying we're living under Big Brother. I'm saying we've moved closer to an intrusive and pushy and authoritarian government over the past 40 years, and that I'm concerned about what it might be like in another 30 or 40, if these trends continue.

Some of the stuff you are complaining about isn't common stuff where I live... you probably know that though.

I am not required to sort my trash, and we can cut down trees whenever we want... We do it all the time, because there are a lot and they are hazardous and can fall on the house. We can also have bonfires, so we could burn our trash technically. I guess you can say we Amish country, but we aren't Amish. You'll see the horse and buggies around here, and Amish grocery stores. We're not in the city limits, so we can get away with all kinds of stuff and we don't pay many taxes.

As for the bird feathers... Hawks have special protection and are considered endangered, so those laws still apply here.

Not sure about the gun in your car...

There could be a lot less government in your life, but you have to live in the right place... Have you thought about moving? I don't foresee people in a well populated community removing all that government to be as lax as they are here. On the other hand, there is an urban eco village here and they are into rearranging community life, so maybe it can be done... but I don't think you can change your community... too much tradition in the way. You'd have to organize a new community or move...
 
I think the only appropriate answer then is to not impose your will on anyone.

But both sides are given the ability to impose their will on everybody through the government...
 
Nope. Freedom is the #1 priority. All others take a back seat.

:bs:

Then why did the right ask Muslims to disregard their freedom of religion and not worship? Freedom wasn't the number one priority then...
 
I have to remember the instant that I cross the state line into NC, I have to get my handgun out of the glovebox and lay it up on the dashboard in plain sight, if I want to stay legal in NC.

Gee, can't just hide it? Why would a real gun-totin US male wanna hide his gun anyway?
 
When it is used as a right wing talking point without explanation, without context, without parameters and without any actual reality attached to it - YES it is. And I will point this out each and every time this happens. I am sick and tired of being sick and tired of the right wing hijacking such terms as FREEDOM and LIBERTY and we are all suppose to bow down and cower because those terms have been invoked like holy water thrown upon a demon.

I believe in freedom too. I believe in liberty too. But I also live in a society of 310 million people and my rights and freedoms have to be carefully and respectufull balanced with all of their rights both as individuals and as members of a larger society.

So YES. throwing out FREEDOM is indeed a cliche without any discussion attached to it as you did here

My statement is not intended to ridicule or mock you or anyone else. It hopefully will spur a discussion that is needed here.

Wow! Very well said.

Government is necessary to protect the people from each other. From other government, from business and from other people. Its a sure thing that business won't do it.
 
And if you take away my freedoms by not expanding government, you have exceeded mine. The simple fact is, rights are not some perfect system where everything will end up all hunky dory. The concept of natural rights is incompatible with human nature, because human nature is imperfect and self contradictory in places, which will always bleed over into our legal systems. We will always have rights that clash.

No, that's not possible. More government does not equal more freedom...that's just not possilbe. The very nature of government is to restrict freedom.
 
:bs:

Then why did the right ask Muslims to disregard their freedom of religion and not worship? Freedom wasn't the number one priority then...

Never happened.
 
When it is used as a right wing talking point without explanation, without context, without parameters and without any actual reality attached to it - YES it is. And I will point this out each and every time this happens. I am sick and tired of being sick and tired of the right wing hijacking such terms as FREEDOM and LIBERTY and we are all suppose to bow down and cower because those terms have been invoked like holy water thrown upon a demon.

I believe in freedom too. I believe in liberty too. But I also live in a society of 310 million people and my rights and freedoms have to be carefully and respectufull balanced with all of their rights both as individuals and as members of a larger society.

So YES. throwing out FREEDOM is indeed a cliche without any discussion attached to it as you did here



My statement is not intended to ridicule or mock you or anyone else. It hopefully will spur a discussion that is needed here.

Really? You think I should have written a dissertation on what freedoms should be held by the people and what should be regulated? Do you really think I have the time to do that in an informal debate? That is an impossible standard for a forum such as this.
 
Without a clear definition of intrusion, this question cannot really be answered, As we see in this thread, intrusion seems to be matter of personal perception.

Oh, and here's the most common definition I found for intrusion:

An inappropriate or unwelcome addition.

Very subjective.
 
Last edited:
Government is necessary to protect the people from each other.
From other government, from business and from other people.
Its a sure thing that business won't do it.

The Government as we know it isn't protecting the people.
It is using the people to satisfied its own lust for power N' control over humanity.

If anything we the people need protection against the Government.
 
I hear people complaining about this left and right (literally and figuratively), that the government is sooooo intrusive and people cant wait to trot out some 1984 references whenever something doesn't go their way.

I was thinking about it the other day. I have probably a lot more interaction with the government than a lot of people. My fiancée and I are receiving food stamps, and as such we have to fill out a quarterly report every 3 months that details what we made and where we made it. We had to disclose our financial information when we signed up....but other than that, we have little to no contact with state or federal agencies. We pay our taxes and various small fees for service, but other than that, I'd say we get left alone.

So what is the grounding of the complaints that the government is so intrusive?

Quick question: Did you post this from a public library?
 
The Government as we know it isn't protecting the people.
It is using the people to satisfied its own lust for power N' control over humanity.

If anything we the people need protection against the Government.

You're signature is written incorrectly. There is no question mark after a directive statement.
 
Traffic control cameras are intrusive?

The city should know whats being built and where. It makes city planning a lot easier and helps keep people from building sloppy buildings that inevitably fall down or hurt someone then someone goes bitching to the city asking why they weren't regulating it.

You have to do taxes once a year. Not a hardship.

Recycling takes a handful of seconds out of your day.


Could be, but probably wont.

OMG! You have to move it a whole five inches!


It really isnt. You complain about having to sort your recycling or spend ten minutes at the county office getting a building permit and it REALLY sounds lame.

"I should be able to throw out ALL my trash together, it's my freedom!" Come on. You live in a society that has done pretty much miraculous things for you and is even willing to help you (mostly) if something goes wrong in your life and you need help. You live in a society where you are free to speak and express yourself as you see fit.

The least you can do is get a freaking building permit and sort your damn trash.

Every response you've given is based on a level of inconvenience. It's simply not about that. Much much deeper.
 
You're signature is written incorrectly.
There is no question mark after a directive statement.

LMAO! Thanks for pointing that out to me.

Much appreciated.
But it's ok... I like writing incorrectly.

It's my way of sayin' I'm stupid. :golf
 
Are you completely and utterly unaware of how many oddball laws, many of them Federal, there are which can make you a FELON for something you didn't even know was illegal? Things that are NOT common sense, like "don't rob stores", but things like... well hell, just watch this video by a law professor and former prosecutor:

Right there with you. We have reached a point where "illegal" doesn't come anywhere being the same thing as "wrong."

20 years ago, commentators couldn't stop bitching about people who "got off" because of a technicality. Now, people's lives are being destroyed by technicalities and nobody wants to talk about it.
 
Then you completely missed my point. If I want to have a society where there is government regulation, then it is my right to attempt to have such a society while those who do not wish one have the same right to attempt the opposite. Ideally, we would somehow both get out way, but practically that is impossible. In the end, both sides of the issue end up imposing their will on the other side. Its the way it must be, because those who would try to change my way of life, which has a preference for regulation, end up imposing on me and my right to try and steer my life the way I think is best.

The answer is not libertarianism because that ends up harming me and my preferences.

Why can't that exist? If I don't want to live in your society of regulations and laws then why would you force me to? I leave you to your own devices and you leave me to my own. What's the problem?
 
Even if people die before a regulation occurs, the regulation is over an entire industry while a court decision is only over a specific instance or maybe a whole company. World of difference.

This is all assuming that food safety is a problem without government regulation when it most assuredly is not.
 
But both sides are given the ability to impose their will on everybody through the government...

And I contest the fact that people have that ability. It's immoral and inefficient.
 
Wow! Very well said.

Government is necessary to protect the people from each other. From other government, from business and from other people. Its a sure thing that business won't do it.

Who protects us from government, then?
 
Who protects us from government, then?

Each branch of the government is a check upon the other.
Each level of government is a check upon the other.
The Constitution serves to check the power of government.
The political parties within each branch serve to check power within that branch.
People have power of such things as votes in elections to check that power of government.
People also have power in such mechanisms such as recall, referendum and initiative to check government power.
 
It's not a who, it's a what, and it's the same thing that protects us from being run over by private industry:

Vigilance.

What? What was the point of posting this?
 
Back
Top Bottom