Are you concerned at all about giving Obama or any future president the authority to lock anyone up as long as they want merely based on their assertion that you're some sort of enemy combatant?
That's kind of the difference between a king and a president. The king can put anyone in a dungeon but the president has to prove that you are guilty via a process that's based on separation of powers.
It's true that this puts us all at some risk from criminals or others. Like if the government thought your neighbor was a murderer but couldn't prove it this would put you at risk. But the alternative is a police state. The government can lock him up and doesn't have to prove he's guilty. Sure, you're safer from your neighbor. But who's going to protect you from your government?
Are you concerned at all about giving Obama or any future president the authority to lock anyone up as long as they want merely based on their assertion that you're some sort of enemy combatant?
ReplyDeleteThat's kind of the difference between a king and a president. The king can put anyone in a dungeon but the president has to prove that you are guilty via a process that's based on separation of powers.
It's true that this puts us all at some risk from criminals or others. Like if the government thought your neighbor was a murderer but couldn't prove it this would put you at risk. But the alternative is a police state. The government can lock him up and doesn't have to prove he's guilty. Sure, you're safer from your neighbor. But who's going to protect you from your government?