The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2013 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul.
General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here


Comment: I disagree. Here's why:
I disagree. Here's why:
An uninformed doctor is a bad doctor.
An uninformed lawyer is a bad lawyer.
An uninformed engineer is a bad engineer.
An uninformed salesman is a bad salesman.
An uninformed pilot is a bad pilot.
An uninformed manager is a bad manager.
An uninformed nurse is a bad nurse.
An uninformed mechanic is a bad mechanic.
An uninformed.... well, you get the point.
A government official claiming ignorance of the law, when an ordinary person on the street can't do so, makes a complete mockery of the justice system. They swore an oath to uphold their contract(the constitution), and are obligated to know the terms. Ordinary citizens can't get out of a contract by claiming ignorance of the terms. Why should gov't officials be able to do so?
"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."
Replies to this comment: