Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: UK privatization of police farce

  1. #1
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    UK privatization of police farce

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLfghLQE3F4&feature=fvst

    A privatization of the police. Enjoy the very end of the video.

    "A bit of Fry and Laurie"
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  2. #2
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Venator View Post
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLfghLQE3F4&feature=fvst

    A privatization of the police. Enjoy the very end of the video.

    "A bit of Fry and Laurie"
    I think privatization of the police force may not be completely as shown here. Customers would demand good customer service or they'd take their business elsewhere. We are talking about private, free enterprise, open to competition, right?

    Videos like this are created to misinform and create a mockery out of Libertarian ideas and not convey the whole message/idea/solution/proposal, only the bad or ridiculous part of it. Nothing more than humerous propaganda.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  3. #3
    Regular Member NHCGRPR45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Chesterfield Township, MI
    Posts
    1,137
    IMO Privatization of police is not completely a bad idea. I firmly stand behind PMC's.
    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776

    Michigan Concealed Pistol Instructor. Cost 80.00 With advanced techniques included free. PM for more information!

  4. #4
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830
    Quote Originally Posted by NHCGRPR45 View Post
    IMO Privatization of police is not completely a bad idea. I firmly stand behind PMC's.
    Seems to me like mercenaries in a war zone and civilian police either public or private is a very different job description.

    Personally, I rather like the structure of modern police departments. There is a good command chain of accountability. A department is accountable to the city council, AG's office, mayor and police and fire board. The people can remedy unlawful actions by the police with law suits, complaints to the department and various other entities, and by asking the mayor to fire the chief. If a mayor is in a corrupt chief's pocket, a campaign to unseat the mayor can be launched, attempting to replace him or her with a mayor who clean up the department. Even though flawed, this system is very workable for the greater good by those who take the time to use the system.

    PD's already run themselves too much like a closed door private business instead of what they are, organizations of servants hired by and for the people. Any further steps to privatize the criminal justice system are in my opinion dangerous.

    Though I will say I agree, mercenaries, and for that matter all types of legal private security forces are a good idea.
    Last edited by Michigander; 01-11-2011 at 10:30 PM.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  5. #5
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigander View Post
    Personally, I rather like the structure of modern police departments. There is a good command chain of accountability.
    Yes, the chain of command, which like Warren, instructs officers to arrest or at the very least ticket or harass anyone seen with a firearm. The city council supports the Police Chief in these stances. The chain of command works so well there, wouldn't you agree?
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    Yes, the chain of command, which like Warren, instructs officers to arrest or at the very least ticket or harass anyone seen with a firearm. The city council supports the Police Chief in these stances. The chain of command works so well there, wouldn't you agree?
    Are you offering to help run a mayoral campaign?
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  7. #7
    Regular Member NHCGRPR45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Chesterfield Township, MI
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigander View Post
    Seems to me like mercenaries in a war zone and civilian police either public or private is a very different job description.

    Personally, I rather like the structure of modern police departments. There is a good command chain of accountability. A department is accountable to the city council, AG's office, mayor and police and fire board. The people can remedy unlawful actions by the police with law suits, complaints to the department and various other entities, and by asking the mayor to fire the chief. If a mayor is in a corrupt chief's pocket, a campaign to unseat the mayor can be launched, attempting to replace him or her with a mayor who clean up the department. Even though flawed, this system is very workable for the greater good by those who take the time to use the system.

    PD's already run themselves too much like a closed door private business instead of what they are, organizations of servants hired by and for the people. Any further steps to privatize the criminal justice system are in my opinion dangerous.

    Though I will say I agree, mercenaries, and for that matter all types of legal private security forces are a good idea.
    Yes, soldier police may not work every place. But lets face it ALL "civilian" police forces that I know of are of the para-military type. From rank structure to training, TO those who are hired! Very high number of former military. You could conceiveably say that what we have is near PMC type LE enforcement. An, extremely high number of the "elite" LE units SWAT SERT type teams have had at the very least been trained by former elites! who here it comes were or are from "elite" military units. The green berets, detachment "delta" SEALS SAS all train our LE guys in how they do there jobs.

    The model of what a PMC is was IMO EO, ex SAS some FFL and a few "others", started a company. And bam the "modern PMC" was started. They were not around very long. Why?? You may ask?? Well its because they were simply to good at what they did and they became the threat. And many of those guys IMO run and operate there own little companies in countries most of us couldn't name and restore order faster, without the civilian casualties that a modern military does.

    I'll admit I am biased, but with a leadership focused on being for the "people" I truely believe in some situation less than a hundred high speed soldiers could easily do what several thousand couldn't or couldn't as swiftly accurately or as well.

    As a loose analogy you turn a 1000 pound free fall bomb into a tomahawk cruise missle. True both get the job done but you can't re-task that dumb bomb.
    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776

    Michigan Concealed Pistol Instructor. Cost 80.00 With advanced techniques included free. PM for more information!

  8. #8
    Regular Member Bailenforcer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    City
    Posts
    1,077
    Interesting how once again so called Libertarian minded people embrace Nazism as a great idea. Their profound ignorance of history again rears it's ugly head.

    In Nazi Germany the SS was a private Police force. The key tenants of Fascism is where Government and Corporations merge as one. hell even the Movie Robo Cop tried to point out the error in that thinking, and obviously it failed. Somalia is a good modern day example on what private Police forces become. Now we just call them War Lords. I fear for the fools that Parade around as all knowing trumpeting idiocy as a solution to stupidity, as soon we will loose this country to a feudal system where Private forces will once again tear the fabric of a once great society.

    I suggest that once in a while one might remove their faces from gun web sites and learn a little history, maybe try it from an actual book as opposed to some morons opinions on a web forum where the harshest standards are proper political correctness.
    Exo 22:2 "If anyone catches a thief breaking in and hits him so that he dies, he is not guilty of murder.
    Luke 22:36: "Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Luk 11:21 "When a strong man, with all his weapons ready, guards his own house, all his belongings are safe.

  9. #9
    Regular Member NHCGRPR45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Chesterfield Township, MI
    Posts
    1,137
    Any force for good can easily be turned to evil. So at least with this we agree, but sometimes its worth the risk. In Africa, a goverment was nearly overwhelmed by the very warlords you speak of, a small force of less than 50 people with a budget around 60,000 dollars and 1 old helicopter "fixed" the situation.

    In another African nation a warlord to control of a local factory and stationed a force of 50 to 100 personell. 15 men re-took the facillity with no loss of life to the hostages, 1 KIA to the liberators and nearly all BG killed.

    Now I am not advocating we throw out the rule book, I am just saying that we need to play by the same rules. Sometimes when the greatest wish the opposeing force has is to die for his cause, then the only way to win is to grant them there wish. A smart bomb really isn't. But I am pretty sure the view through the scope can tell who is/isn't a threat, a lot better than a drone 30+ thousand feet above a combat zone driven by someone who is nicely secure someplace in america. When war becomes a video game, what you see isn't what you get.
    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776

    Michigan Concealed Pistol Instructor. Cost 80.00 With advanced techniques included free. PM for more information!

  10. #10
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445
    Jesus, I just thought it was funny, and I loved the end. Seems the US is not alone when it comes to police roughing up a citizen. Have any of you even watched the video?
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  11. #11
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    I think privatization of the police force may not be completely as shown here. Customers would demand good customer service or they'd take their business elsewhere. We are talking about private, free enterprise, open to competition, right?

    Videos like this are created to misinform and create a mockery out of Libertarian ideas and not convey the whole message/idea/solution/proposal, only the bad or ridiculous part of it. Nothing more than humerous propaganda.
    It was satire, lighten up Francis.
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Venator View Post
    A privatization of the police. Enjoy the very end of the video.

    "A bit of Fry and Laurie"
    Lol, I get it. I think most of us did. I wonder how Hugh might recall this?
    Last edited by since9; 01-13-2011 at 05:47 PM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Technically, since all law enforcement in the UK are "crown services", they already ARE a "privatized" police force. The Queen owns England. She owns the treasury. All police ultimately answer to her, and are ultimately in service at the whim of the Crown.

    One person controlling the policy, personnel and payroll of LE--sounds "private" to me.

    Anyone who says the Queen of England is "merely a figurehead" has never looked into her portfolio, or actually READ British Statutes. It's all right there in black and white. Parliament is just "bread and circuses" to keep the rabble from pulling another "Guy Fawkes"...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  14. #14
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Yep and Canada and Australia are still owned by the Queen.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  15. #15
    Regular Member NHCGRPR45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Chesterfield Township, MI
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    Technically, since all law enforcement in the UK are "crown services", they already ARE a "privatized" police force. The Queen owns England. She owns the treasury. All police ultimately answer to her, and are ultimately in service at the whim of the Crown.

    One person controlling the policy, personnel and payroll of LE--sounds "private" to me.

    Anyone who says the Queen of England is "merely a figurehead" has never looked into her portfolio, or actually READ British Statutes. It's all right there in black and white. Parliament is just "bread and circuses" to keep the rabble from pulling another "Guy Fawkes"...

    Great point! BAM they are already private! So IMO you could say that all english "citizens" are actually all "serfs"? and "peasants"?? Man I bet they feel repressed! Anyone watch Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail lately??
    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776

    Michigan Concealed Pistol Instructor. Cost 80.00 With advanced techniques included free. PM for more information!

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wayne Co., Michigan, USA
    Posts
    9
    To those of you that like the idea of privatizing law enforcement and or correction facilities. Just think of what will happen in our modern era of corruption.

    Privatizing law makes as much sense as allowing law enforcement to sell confiscated firearms as well as any other confiscated item. There's just too much incentive to do the wrong thing.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    581
    Privatizing the police force would result in more arrests and more tickets being issued to the citizenry in an attempt to justify that company's contract for police services. The American system is not without flaw, but it does allow redress of grievances for civil rights violations, corruption, and other abuses. A private entity will try to justify their existence, and their eyes will be on the bottom line for profit.

    The states and local governments should retain the majority of police powers and the federal government should be more restricted in its LE scope. The state and local governments have a closer connection to the citizenry and accountability is easier to achieve at those levels.

    We can study private police forces and their effectiveness through various university/campus police departments, and certain airport police departments. Some are effective, and then some are very hands off because of the risk of upsetting those with deep pockets. A PD should be accountable to the citizens, and should never be a for profit industry.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigander View Post
    Seems to me like mercenaries in a war zone and civilian police either public or private is a very different job description.

    Personally, I rather like the structure of modern police departments. There is a good command chain of accountability. A department is accountable to the city council, AG's office, mayor and police and fire board. The people can remedy unlawful actions by the police with law suits, complaints to the department and various other entities, and by asking the mayor to fire the chief. If a mayor is in a corrupt chief's pocket, a campaign to unseat the mayor can be launched, attempting to replace him or her with a mayor who clean up the department. Even though flawed, this system is very workable for the greater good by those who take the time to use the system.

    PD's already run themselves too much like a closed door private business instead of what they are, organizations of servants hired by and for the people. Any further steps to privatize the criminal justice system are in my opinion dangerous.

    Though I will say I agree, mercenaries, and for that matter all types of legal private security forces are a good idea.
    I have noticed that private companies rarely claim "sovereign immunity". Although I suppose they might; it would make no less sense than the government doing so.

    But the point remains that accountability to the chain of command has become worthless, and there is little to no liability for any of the "services" government provides, from ineffectual and murderous police farces to the TSA with their carcinogenic false-security bureaucratic-self-justification machines... erm... body scanners.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by palerider116 View Post
    Privatizing the police force would result in more arrests and more tickets being issued to the citizenry in an attempt to justify that company's contract for police services. The American system is not without flaw, but it does allow redress of grievances for civil rights violations, corruption, and other abuses. A private entity will try to justify their existence, and their eyes will be on the bottom line for profit.
    Public police forces would (do) result in more arrests (for victimless crimes) and more tickets being issued to the citizenry in an attempt to justify their jobs and fill their coffers to pay for overtime and bonuses. The private system is not without flaws, but it does allow the redress of grievances through liability, which may not be shirked as routinely done by government at all levels. A bureaucratic entity will try to justify their existence, and their eyes will be on the bottom line to pay their salaries and buy new toys with which to torture, murder, and kidnap us, since they act without liability and concomitantly with impunity.
    Last edited by marshaul; 01-14-2011 at 03:31 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member NHCGRPR45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Chesterfield Township, MI
    Posts
    1,137
    Well maybe i should have clarified when something like this should be used. Like instead of US forces training local police let a private company do it. We could pull out troops sooner and get the PMC's to patrol and do LE type duties. It could even potentially cost less. This PMC law enforcement wouldn't be needed in most countries. Also in disaster type situation private companies can respond far quicker the federal agencies as we saw in Katrina and other natural disasters. Some private companies were in place within hours of being requested, and beat the FEMA personell by days.
    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776

    Michigan Concealed Pistol Instructor. Cost 80.00 With advanced techniques included free. PM for more information!

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    The way I see it, the problem is liability (or lack thereof).

    How can the greatest responsibility be placed with the least chance of it being shirked?

    Currently, it seems that government does anything it likes with impunity. Making private actions seem a whole lot nicer by comparison.

    Either way, what we need is liability (civil and criminal), and lots of it.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Bailenforcer View Post
    Interesting how once again so called Libertarian minded people embrace Nazism as a great idea. Their profound ignorance of history again rears it's ugly head.

    In Nazi Germany the SS was a private Police force. The key tenants of Fascism is where Government and Corporations merge as one. hell even the Movie Robo Cop tried to point out the error in that thinking, and obviously it failed. Somalia is a good modern day example on what private Police forces become. Now we just call them War Lords. I fear for the fools that Parade around as all knowing trumpeting idiocy as a solution to stupidity, as soon we will loose this country to a feudal system where Private forces will once again tear the fabric of a once great society.

    I suggest that once in a while one might remove their faces from gun web sites and learn a little history, maybe try it from an actual book as opposed to some morons opinions on a web forum where the harshest standards are proper political correctness.
    And which history book did you open for these gems of comic relief? Fascism is not the same as Nazism. Not even close, although they are hard to distinguish in terms of result. The merging of corporations and the state was a tenet of Fascism, not Nazism.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
    Italian Fascism and most other fascist movements promote a corporatist economy whereby, in theory, representatives of capital and labour interest groups work together within sectoral corporations to create both harmonious labour relations and maximization of production that would serve the national interest. However, other fascist movements and ideologies, such as Nazism, did not use this form of economy.
    If your definition of fascism references the Italian model, as mine does (and yours seems to), then the Nazis were not fascist. (The Italian model is fine for a definition since the actual word "fascism" was coined by Mussolini for the Italian system.) Either way your history is bunk.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS

    The Waffen-SS were the armed wing of the NSDAP, which was itself constituted as the official party of the Reich with the passage of Gesetz gegen die Neubildung von Parteien of July 14, 1933, or "Law against establishment of political parties", essentially meaning the the Nazi Party were the government. There is no legitimate way by which it may be argued that the SS were a "private organization".

    You may be thinking of the SA (Sturmabteilung "Storm department", the so-called "brownshirts), but they too were a wing of the NSDAP. This would be like claiming that, if the Democratic Party began putting on costumes and beating people who vote Republican, they were a "private police force". "Lawless gang of thugs bent on seizing government power" would be more accurate.

    Or, since neither of the above were actually police at all, you may be thinking of the so-called "Gestapo", the Nazi secret police. Initially, the Gestapo were not part of the SS, but were considered part of the SiPo (Sicherheitspolizei or "security police"), but later became part of the RHSA (Reichssicherheitshauptamt, or "Reich (Imperial) Main Security Office"), which may be considered part of the SS, thanks to both being headed by Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler. Incidentally, Gestapo is short for Geheime Staatspolizei, or "Secret State Police". If the references to "State" and "Reich" aren't enough, I'll make it clear: these were unambiguously governmental agencies.

    Is that enough history-book-opening for you?

    But, no offense, you're a "bail enforcer". I wouldn't expect you to spend much time "opening history books", nor does the statist slant you've put on everything surprise me (Somalian warlords? Are private police? Excuse me while the hilarity subsides.) So I'll forgive the slew of B.S. you just spouted. I'll also forgive your appeal to an absurdly terrible movie for your understanding of history and political theory.
    Last edited by marshaul; 01-17-2011 at 01:49 AM.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    The way I see it, the problem is liability (or lack thereof).

    How can the greatest responsibility be placed with the least chance of it being shirked?

    Currently, it seems that government does anything it likes with impunity.
    And when we object, we're often arrested and thrown in jail for bucking the system."

    Making private actions seem a whole lot nicer by comparison.

    Either way, what we need is liability (civil and criminal), and lots of it.
    Bingo. Very nice analysis. We can begin by working to eliminate immunity. Hold them accountable, at all levels. If Congress can't balance the budget, take it out of their salaries, first. Etc.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    We can begin by working to eliminate immunity. Hold them accountable, at all levels. If Congress can't balance the budget, take it out of their salaries, first. Etc.
    Amen, brother. We need to start eliminating immunity from top to bottom. The concept is an archaic monarchial one, and in a modern society where government provides a slew of (read: too many) "services", its abolition is an absolute must if any of these "services" are to be rendered as such.
    Last edited by marshaul; 01-17-2011 at 02:47 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •