--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
<mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> Kevin wrote:
>
> > How is this different to the borders between Schengen
countries? The UK and
> > the ROI operate a common travel area, so there doesn't need
to be
> > immigration controls.
>
> If that's their choice, they shouldn't be surprised that the border
attracts
> various misconduct. They have invited it, so they shouldn't
complain. When
> they wake up, they know how to stop it. That doesn't mean that
legitimate
> travel or commerce should stop.
>
> Leaving an international boundary totally unguarded (and in
this case even
> blatantly unmarked) is like leaving ones door unlocked.
>
> Mike D. wrote:
>
> > & of course most of what is called border crime comprises
> > supposed offenses that wouldnt even exist if the borders
didnt
>
> True, but a boundary must exist if Ireland wants to be a
separate nation from
> the United Kingdom, which it became in 1921 after long
agitation. Sovereign
> nations are free to have differing laws and governmental
systems. (That is why
> we have different nations.)
all these conventional rants are irrelevant as well as tendentious
but they still deserve to be corrected when they are simply untrue
not just sovereign nations but everyone is free to have differing
laws & governmental systems
& that is because everyone is actually sovereign
& there are different nations only because there are different
local monopolies on violence in different places
& their turfs & borders & laws are a function of their monopolies
so perhaps i should have said
& inserted just before the part you left out
as follows
the primary abomination is the nation states themselves
rather than only their borders
which are thus actually not a fundamental but merely a derivative
offense against nature
so i stand abridged
as well as corrected by myself
which however still happily leaves all the so called criminals to
continue to be the innocents that they actually are
of course those who believe in the rule of law & are eager to
subordinate their personal sovereignty to it view as miscreants
those who live only by natural law
which however is the law unto ourselves that we all are in any
case
moreover
just because one may find oneself in an area controlled by a
nation state or smaller armed gang doesnt mean one has
invited anything
nor chosen to participate with it in any way
nor need one even be affected by it
for that really is a personal choice
& finally
my door is always unlocked
& not least because the laws of nature are precisely the same
for all
it is not a difference in laws that causes some states & some
people to lock their doors
the only really operative law is
one gets back whatever one flows forth
& the universe delivers it
& no one can run or hide or lock themselves away from that
no matter how hard they may try
This, and not the boundary, is what creates the
> opportunities and incentives for misdeeds. In the unlikely
event that two
> separate nations had precisely the same laws, there would be
no such incentives
> or opportunities.
>
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA