A letter to Gordon Brumm

[Jim O'Bryan]

To Mr. Brumm

I am writing in response to your Sept 6 article "Supreme Court: What Locke Actually Said".

It amazes me how Leftists like Mr. Brumm try to square their ideology to fit the Constitution. The Constitution does two basic things. It grants the federal government certain enumerated powers and it seperates those powers between the three branches. Any power not enumerated in the Constitution was to remain with the states or the people. Any further powers not enumerated could only be added by amending the Constitution.

Since vertually everthing the federal government currently does is not listed in the Constitution (for example the entire New Deal, all of the Great Society programs, the space program, farm subsidies, federal funding of education, funding of the arts, or well you name it's all unconstitutional). These powers were simply usurped and should be considered tyrannical.

Also Mr. Brumm rejects the concept of propery rights. I want to know does he support legalizing stealing, mugging, and carjacking. After all these are violations of property rights. Does Mr. Brumm only believe the government can violate peoples property.

Stealing is defined by using coercion to take property from someone unwillinly. If I put a gun to someones head and force them to give me their wallet and then turn and give it to some worthy charity, am I still not considered an immoral criminal. Does this process somehow become moral just because it is supported by a majority and carried out by the government.

Government is an insrtument of force and the only justification for using force is in the defense of Life, Libery, and Property.


Adam Spivey

[Gordon Brumm]

Well, why is the government justified in using force to protect Life, Liberty, and/or Property?

GB

[Stephen Calhoun]

One thing that amuses me everytime out is when people hold up the Constitution as if there isn't a structure of Title and Regulation (i.e. Federal Law,) derived from and erected upon it.

The other thing of course is that these same folks can't tell you what Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, et al were on about as they argued between themselves about the possible ramifications of this Constitution.

On the other hand, I'm all for the government defending libraries. :-)