Quote:
Originally Posted by angryssg
Are you assuming that I would lock them up without due process? They have rights until they break the Law. I am not saying haul them off immediately, but give them a reasonable deadline in which to accomplish the objective. If they fail to achieve desired results within the alloted time, then they broke the Law. That is of course assuming that a Law that will never get passed becomes effective.
This entire conversation is hypothetical. It is because of arguements like this that nothing ever gets accomplished the way it should. We spend years talking about the issues without ever fixing them. I am laughing uncontrollably as I write this.
Keep in mind that ideas are just that, ideas. Nothing in life is black or white with a definate answer unless you are refering to math. I find it funny that we will beat our heads against a wall trying to change a persons mind instead of comming to a compromise to most effectivley solve or minimize the problem.
You so quickly pointed out that my ideas go against the constitution, which can be changed. What is your solution? Can you think of one that would work best for all of those involved? I would love to hear it. (Not sarcasim)
I do not mind supported evidence being used to disprove my ideas and theories. That is what a good productive argument is all about. But, you cant just say that I am wrong and leave it at that. Provide your own insight and ideas so that the conversation stays open and a cooperative conclusion can be reached.
EDIT: I could have been a smartass and said that when I enlisted I had no idea what the constitution which I was supporting and defending actually read. DEE DEE DEE! Then where would the conversation have gone?
|
I don't understand most of your post Angry but if you are arguing that indefinitely detaining people for being homeless is within the bounds of the constitution I would disagree. If you are arguing that the constitution should be changed to allow for the indefinite detention of people for not having a home then I would disagree with that too. It is one thing to argue that homeless people shouldn't be given governmental handouts, or even that you should not personally give them spare change so as not to support their lifestyle. It is quite another to suggest that they should be denied rights intrinsic to American citizenship. Yours is a version of America quite different from what our founders envisioned in my opinion.