Fighting Back

Should the Government Have Just Killed Jared Loughner?

by Laurence Vance, LRC

Jared Loughner, the guy who killed six people and shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in the head in a shooting rampage in Tucson, Arizona, earlier this year, is awaiting trial. In light of the government recently killing an American citizen (Anwar al-Awlaki) with no trial and with no evidence that he actually killed anyone (yes, I think he was an evil man), should the government have just killed Jared Loughner? He actually killed people in front of many witnesses and tried to kill a member of Congress. Of course not, most would say; he should be tried first. But because Anwar al-Awlaki has been labeled a “terrorist,” many Americans are cheering his killing by the government. Yet, Timothy McVeigh, who actually committed acts of terrorism, had a trial before his execution. Heck, even Charles Manson had a trial. Here is Ron Paul on the dangers of assassination without trial. And to those Americans cheering the killing of al-Awlaki—watch your step, you may be next if you say something the government doesn’t like.

All Hail The New Constitution!

It’s much easier than the old one, and much shorter, too, thus accommodating the abbreviated attention span of today’s rulers.

It’s also secret, of course, lest it confound millions of youngsters preparing for the AP Government test (now known as “Ancient American History 101”).

And it changes all the time. (Hey, just like the old one! There’s stare decisis for you!)

The new Constitution is the secret enemies list, dictated daily by the White House, of people “we” (ahem) can kill any time, anywhere. It supersedes all that old-fashioned stuff like law, morality, and liberty. This is a Constitution that will put people back to work — especially if you’re a good shot!

Are you on it? Don’t ask. If you do, you are.

Share