Dangerous? Yes, but that's just the nature of handling one's own life and comminty: there's always the possibility of something going wrong somewhere. But compared to the risk of inaction, it's quite negligable.

Really? Your complaint was that the immigrants mess up your yard. This is the risk of inaction, compared to being killed by trying to take the law into your own hands. Yeah, that's a good risk assessment. It's much better to risk your life than to clean up your yard.

Irresponsible? I'll tell you what's irresponsible - trusting people with alterior motives to look out for you intersts! I've been stabbed in the back too many times to trust some political yokel - who knows nothing about my interests nor cares about my community - to trust them with much of anything. From my point of view, what you advocate is irresponsible...

Taking up arms to police your own borders is irresponsible in that it risks your life un-necessarily as well as the lives of others. If you really don't like the politicians in your local area you should run yourself (gee, what an idea). If you want things to change, then get some political power yourself and try to enact those changes. It's a much better idea than killing other people.

As an aside, if you do start shooting at people, I won't bat an eyelash if you get arrested for it and tried for murder. You might not think it's fair, but there are alternatives to taking the lives of others and if you can't figure out how to do so, then you deserve to be tried for any crimes you commit.

If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for.. but there are certain to ones you want to vote AGAINST. In case of doubt vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong.

First of all thank you for reminding me of "Time Enough For Love". I read it in my teens and still have a head full of Lazarus quotes. However it is interesting that very few (do any?)democratic systems have genuine abstain votes, i.e "I bothered to turn up but I don't like any of you" type boxes. So how do you vote against? you can't. But you can vote FOR, in the way that Ebon proposes. Vote for the candidate that best represents your values. Shift the balance. Have patience. Democratic systems have built in inertia; they do not respond well to revolutionary concepts, but will evolve in response to environmental pressure.
Back to Bob Heinlein: he was a reactionary, Reagon/Thatcher-ite old reprobate with slightly paedophillic tendancies who spun great yarns that perversly had a lot of humanist values embedded in them. Takes all sorts eh?

If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for.. but there are certain to ones you want to vote AGAINST. In case of doubt vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong.

From the Notebooks of Lazarus Long in _Time Enough for Love_ by Robert Heinlein

Then come back here and try to tell us that it's not your duty to participate in the political process.

What good does it do to use these channels unless you happen to have (a) lots of time and money or (b) a cause that the plebeans will be sympathetic to? I don't have the time and money to "lobby" (read: bribe) a Congressman and - to my knowledge - hardly anyone outside my community cares about what goes on here, so there's no point in trying.

Also, don't count on me or any others like me in my area going to jail: our law enforcement has enough problems as it is without having us for enemies, and some members are even sympathetic towards us. At best, they might give us a heads-up on activities occuring near our property they can't (or won't) get involved in; at worst, they leave us be.

But I have participated in the past: nothing got done - the border near my home is still insecure, government agencies continue to develop new means of tacking its citizens (read: acuiring the ability to invade my privacy) and our law enforcement is still as ineffective as ever. Long story short, I don't trust the system anymore.

On the basis that on this thread at least your anarchic views are vaguely on topic for a change, can I offer this thought? All government is to some extent or other incompetent, corrupt, unnaccountable and beaurocratic. How much I guess depends on your point of view and to what extent you support a particular administration. Similarly all democracies are flawed to some extent, be they proportional representation, first past post, single transferable vote etc. etc. But given that you are lucky enough to live in a democracy where voting, petitioning, lobbying and advocacy are all valid instruments for change, why not use them? No-one is stopping you from taking an individual stand and shooting every illegal immigrant crossing your border, just be prepared to take the consequences. But why ignore the legitimate political process available to you? No -one says vigilantes can't vote, at least while they're still out of jail.

"While I think atheists should vote in this election, I disagree that voting in elections is a moral obligation of each citizen. As Howard Zinn states in his People's History of the United States, when the system is rigged to eliminate actual choice, and the system is designed to promote buying in and thus complicity with it, not voting can actually be considered a moral obligation."

Bulls eye! The way I see it, the system is rigged against the average person - so one has no choice but to act outside of it to get things done.

When the government is incompitent, outsiders are encroaching on your home and there's no "god" to step in and set everything straight via some sort of "Deus Ex Machina," who else does one have to turn to but himself?

"Okay, but you DO choose NOT to participate in our system of government, however flawed it may be. So as far as I'm concerned, you got the government you asked for, and you have no reason to complain. That's my point."

But I have participated in the past: nothing got done - the border near my home is still insecure, government agencies continue to develop new means of tacking its citizens (read: acuiring the ability to invade my privacy) and our law enforcement is still as ineffective as ever. Long story short, I don't trust the system anymore.

"Then why are you still living here?"

As much as I find the leadership lacking, it's still my home: this is where my intersts lie and I will continue to fight for them - with or without the approval of society.

Also, I strongly doubt that the government of another nation would do any better for me: I'll take my chances here (where I have a home-field advantage) rather than gamble on the mercies of a foreign government.

"The only thing I am condemning is your refusal to vote while having a strong negative opinion about the system as it stands."

I don't vote because there's nobody to for! No matter who wins the election, nothing changes.

"You went off about immigration and vigilantism, and were offended that I noticed your beliefs are similar to Rush Limbaugh's."

I brought that up because you accused me of being xenophobic for wanting the border secured and I wanted to put some context to my earlier statements - I'm not xenophobic, I just want my town to be left alone and will resort to any means to ensure that it is.

I'll admit that Limbaugh and I share common ground on this issue, but there's little else in terms of similarity between us.