September 16, 2015

Rule of Law? You Must Be Joking

The recent Kim Davis debacle has those on the right and the left talking about the rule of law.

What a joke. 

America is a nation of rampant lawlessness.

In his recent book, Charles Murray writes "about the legal system not as it looks from thirty thousand feet to law professors, where everything can be fit together and rationalized, but how it looks at ground level to ordinary law-abiding citizens." [1] The legal system in the U. S., when viewed from this perspective, is indistinguishable from lawlessness.

Murray points out seven manifestations of lawlessness:
  • When the legal process is more costly than you can afford, it is indistinguishable from lawlessness.
  • Criminal law that is sufficiently removed from the concept of mens rea [criminal intent] is indistinguishable from lawlessness.
  • Civil law that is sufficiently arbitary and capricious is indistinguishable from lawlessness.
  • Law that is sufficiently complex is indistinguishable from lawlessness.
  • Law that is sufficiently subjective is indistinguishable from lawlessness.
  • Law that is sufficiently discretionary is indistinguishable from lawlessness.
  • Law that permits the state to take private property without compensation, or to force the transfer of private property to other private individuals, is indistinguishable from lawlessness. [2]
The American legal system is contradictory, arbitrary, and tyrannical. Whistle-blowers who expose criminality are charged under the espionage act while criminals like Hilary Clinton and Dick Cheney walk free. Does that sound like the rule of law to you? The highest law in this land is the constitution, yet it is flagrantly violated by both political parties and all three branches of government. We are not ruled by law in this country. We are ruled by men.

Still don't buy it? Then ask yourself, When was the last time you saw a cop get pulled over for speeding? 

1. Murray, Charles. By the People: Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission (Crown Forum, 2015), p. 32.
2. ibid, pp. 32-48.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Follow by Email

Support C&C by Using One of Our Amazon Associate Links