Comment: Read it again

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Well, that's what his third (see in situ)

Read it again

"Now, if you join al Qaeda, bear arms and attack U.S. forces, no one will argue that you still have a right to a trial"

In other words, force can be used to stop an attack in progress. At the individual level, we call this self-defense. If a guy is running at you with a weapon, you don't try him first (?), you shoot him to defend yourself!

As I said above, Rand's point here is to tell people that affording terrorists the right to a trial does not prevent us from using force to stop acts of terrorism in progress. This point needs to be made, because a lot of people think like this; they've been told for years that we have to deny terrorists the right to trial in order to be safe. And of course this is nonsense. A trial has nothing to do with security. A trial is about determining whether/how to punish the criminal after the fact.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."