Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!ima!inmet!nrh From: nrh@inmet.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Comments on the Libertarian Platform Message-ID: <1806@inmet.UUCP> Date: Sat, 10-Nov-84 02:02:38 EST Article-I.D.: inmet.1806 Posted: Sat Nov 10 02:02:38 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 11-Nov-84 19:52:36 EST Lines: 67 Nf-ID: #R:ucbcad:-277500:inmet:7800172:000:3615 Nf-From: inmet!nrh Nov 8 16:11:00 1984 >***** inmet:net.politics / ucbcad!faustus / 3:34 pm Nov 7, 1984 >> We therefor call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the >> abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, >> and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country >> illegally. We oppose government welfare payments to non-citizens just as >> we oppose government welfare payments to all other persons. > > Then people from countries with miserable conditions due > to overcrowding will flood into the country until conditions > here are as bad as the other countries. Is this what you want? > No, Wayne, but it wouldn't work that way. People have ONE mouth, and TWO hands. For a little more backing, try and get hold of the last two issues of "REASON" magazine. > >> Children are human beings and, as such, have all the rights of human beings. >> >> We oppose all laws that empower government officials to seize children and >> make them "wards of the state" or, by means of child labor laws and compulsory >> education, to infringe on their freedom to work or learn as they choose. >> We oppose all legally created or sanctioned discrimination directed at any >> other artificially defined sub-category of human beings. Specifically we >> oppose ordinances that outlaw adults-only apartments. >> >> We also support the repeal of all laws establishing any category of crimes >> applicable to children for which adults would not be similarly answerable >> such as curfew, smoking, and alcoholic beverage laws, and other status >> offenses. Similarly, we favor the repeal of "stubborn child" laws and laws >> establishing the category of "persons in need of supervision". We call for >> an end to the practice in many states of jailing children not accused of any >> crime. We seek the repeal of all "children's codes" of statutes which >> abridge due process protections for young people. We further favor the >> abolition of the juvenile court system, so that juveniles will be held fully >> responsible for their crimes. > > This is absurd! How can you hold a ten-year-old responsible for > actions that he doesn't even understand? Children are entitled to > rights, as are adults, but there is a vast difference between an > adult and a young child, and to treat them the same in the legal > system is like extending laws against theft to animals, so if > a dog steals your food he can be tried and sent to jail. Children > aren't animals, but they are similar in that they can't be held > responsible for many of their actions. > The current situation means that an (under-18) child cannot be tried for murder even if he does it repeatedly. To consider your metaphor, a dog can be SHOT for stealing food, and nobody will talk of imprisoning you for doing so. The problem is not one of age but of responsibility. I've my own arguments with the Platform about children's rights, but the notion that one may be guilty of willful murder at age 17 is not a point of contention between us. >> Children should always have the right to establish their maturity by assuming >> the administration and protection of their own rights, ending dependency upon >> their parents or other guardians and assuming all the responsibilities >> of adulthood. > > What if they really aren't mature enough for this? Just saying, > "Sure, I'm mature enough" doesn't make it true. > No, but finding your own job, supporting yourself, finding a place to live where you are not dependant on someone else seem to me to count. This is, of course, what they're saying.