#harry browne

I want a government small enough to fit inside the Constitution.

You can't give the government the power to do good without also giving it the power to do bad - in fact, to do anything it wants.

The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it.

We should never define libertarian positions in terms coined by liberals and conservatives, nor as some variant of their positions. We are not fiscally conservative and socially liberal. We are libertarians, who believe in individual liberty and personal responsibility on all issues at all times.

Republicans campaign like Libertarians and govern like Democrats.

For those looking for security, be forewarned that there's nothing more insecure than a political promise.

A little government involvement is just as dangerous as a lot - because the first leads inevitably to the second.

Left-wing politicians take away your liberty in the name of children and of fighting poverty, while right-wing politicians do it in the name of family values and fighting drugs. Either way, government gets bigger and you become less free.

The government is good at one thing. It knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say, "See if it weren't for the government, you wouldn't be able to walk".

I'm for a flat tax -- as long as the flat rate is zero. The object is to get rid of big government, not find a new way of financing it.

The American heritage was one of individual liberty, personal responsibility and freedom from government. Unfortunately, that heritage has been lost. Americans no longer have the freedom to direct their own lives. Today, it is the government that is free - free to do whatever it wants. There is no subject, no issue, no matter that is not subject to legislation.

It is well known that in war, the first casualty is truth - that during any war truth is forsaken for propaganda.

The police can't stop an intruder, mugger, or stalker from hurting you. They can pursue him only after he has hurt or killed you. Protecting yourself from harm is your responsibility, and you are far less likely to be hurt in a neighborhood of gun-owners than in one of disarmed citizens - even if you don't own a gun yourself.

Once upon a time, government budgets were balanced, our money was sound, the streets were safe, and taxes imposed by all levels of government took less than 10% of our income.

It's wrong for someone to confiscate your money, give it to someone else, and call that "compassion."

Forcing people to be generous isn't humanitarian, effective, compassionate, or moral. Only acts that are truly voluntary for all concerned can be truly compassionate.

Whatever the issue, let freedom offer us a hundred choices, instead of having government force one answer on everyone.

Immigrants used to come to America seeking freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom from government. Now they come looking for free health care, free education, and a free lunch.

Our government, taxes, and ideas of freedom are already duplicates of the Old World. Our politicians determine how we should live our lives - and our individual liberties are sacrificed for the benefit of the Fatherland.

The government's War on Poverty has transformed poverty from a short-term misfortune into a career choice.

In almost all matters, the real question should be: why are we letting government handle this?

The problem is big government. If whoever controls government can impose his way upon you, you have to fight constantly to prevent the control from being harmful. With small, limited government, it doesn't much matter who controls it, because it can't do you much harm.

The seeds of today's runaway government were planted when it was decided that government should help those who can't help themselves. From that modest, compassionate beginning to today's out-of-control mega-state, there's a straight, unbroken line. Once the door was open, once it was settled that the government should help some people at the expense of others, there was no stopping it.

There are no violent gangs fighting over aspirin territories. There are no violent gangs fighting over whisky territories or computer territories or anything else that's legal. There are only criminal gangs fighting over territories covering drugs, gambling, prostitution, and other victimless crimes. Making a non-violent activity a crime creates a black market, which attracts criminals and gangs, which turns what was once a relatively harmless activity affecting a small group of people into a widespread epidemic of drug use and gang warfare.

Can you think of a single area of government in which George Bush hasn't already made things worse than Bill Clinton did?

I say that the Second Amendment doesn't allow for exceptions - or else it would have read that the right "to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, unless Congress chooses otherwise." And because there are no exceptions, I disagree with my fellow panelists who say the existing gun laws should be enforced. Those laws are unconstitutional [and] wrong - because they put you at a disadvantage to armed criminals, to whom the laws are no inconvenience.

When you know you're capable of dealing with whatever comes, you have the only security the world has to offer.

Government seems to operate on the principle that if even one individual is incapable of using his freedom competently, no one can be allowed to be free.

The problem with politics isn't the money; it's the power.

"Freedom and responsibility aren't interconnected things. They are the same thing." 

I want a government small enough to fit inside the Constitution.

You can't give the government the power to do good without also giving it the power to do bad - in fact, to do anything it wants.

The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it.

We should never define libertarian positions in terms coined by liberals and conservatives, nor as some variant of their positions. We are not fiscally conservative and socially liberal. We are libertarians, who believe in individual liberty and personal responsibility on all issues at all times.

Republicans campaign like Libertarians and govern like Democrats.

For those looking for security, be forewarned that there's nothing more insecure than a political promise.

A little government involvement is just as dangerous as a lot - because the first leads inevitably to the second.

Left-wing politicians take away your liberty in the name of children and of fighting poverty, while right-wing politicians do it in the name of family values and fighting drugs. Either way, government gets bigger and you become less free.

The government is good at one thing. It knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say, "See if it weren't for the government, you wouldn't be able to walk".

I'm for a flat tax -- as long as the flat rate is zero. The object is to get rid of big government, not find a new way of financing it.

The American heritage was one of individual liberty, personal responsibility and freedom from government. Unfortunately, that heritage has been lost. Americans no longer have the freedom to direct their own lives. Today, it is the government that is free - free to do whatever it wants. There is no subject, no issue, no matter that is not subject to legislation.

It is well known that in war, the first casualty is truth - that during any war truth is forsaken for propaganda.

The police can't stop an intruder, mugger, or stalker from hurting you. They can pursue him only after he has hurt or killed you. Protecting yourself from harm is your responsibility, and you are far less likely to be hurt in a neighborhood of gun-owners than in one of disarmed citizens - even if you don't own a gun yourself.

Once upon a time, government budgets were balanced, our money was sound, the streets were safe, and taxes imposed by all levels of government took less than 10% of our income.

It's wrong for someone to confiscate your money, give it to someone else, and call that "compassion."

Forcing people to be generous isn't humanitarian, effective, compassionate, or moral. Only acts that are truly voluntary for all concerned can be truly compassionate.

Whatever the issue, let freedom offer us a hundred choices, instead of having government force one answer on everyone.

Immigrants used to come to America seeking freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom from government. Now they come looking for free health care, free education, and a free lunch.

Our government, taxes, and ideas of freedom are already duplicates of the Old World. Our politicians determine how we should live our lives - and our individual liberties are sacrificed for the benefit of the Fatherland.

The government's War on Poverty has transformed poverty from a short-term misfortune into a career choice.

In almost all matters, the real question should be: why are we letting government handle this?

The problem is big government. If whoever controls government can impose his way upon you, you have to fight constantly to prevent the control from being harmful. With small, limited government, it doesn't much matter who controls it, because it can't do you much harm.

The seeds of today's runaway government were planted when it was decided that government should help those who can't help themselves. From that modest, compassionate beginning to today's out-of-control mega-state, there's a straight, unbroken line. Once the door was open, once it was settled that the government should help some people at the expense of others, there was no stopping it.

There are no violent gangs fighting over aspirin territories. There are no violent gangs fighting over whisky territories or computer territories or anything else that's legal. There are only criminal gangs fighting over territories covering drugs, gambling, prostitution, and other victimless crimes. Making a non-violent activity a crime creates a black market, which attracts criminals and gangs, which turns what was once a relatively harmless activity affecting a small group of people into a widespread epidemic of drug use and gang warfare.

Can you think of a single area of government in which George Bush hasn't already made things worse than Bill Clinton did?

I say that the Second Amendment doesn't allow for exceptions - or else it would have read that the right "to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, unless Congress chooses otherwise." And because there are no exceptions, I disagree with my fellow panelists who say the existing gun laws should be enforced. Those laws are unconstitutional [and] wrong - because they put you at a disadvantage to armed criminals, to whom the laws are no inconvenience.

When you know you're capable of dealing with whatever comes, you have the only security the world has to offer.

Government seems to operate on the principle that if even one individual is incapable of using his freedom competently, no one can be allowed to be free.

The problem with politics isn't the money; it's the power.