Freedom Fighters

You know, the term freedom fighters could be misconstrued as someone who fights freedom. Think of "crime fighters". They are usually somebody who goes in search of the evil doer and brings them to justice. But, when we say "freedom fighters" we are typically referring to those militant organizations that rise up against an oppressive regime. Why is that? Why do we not say that freedom fighters are those folks who rise up against the hallmarks of freedom? Why do crime fighters equate to "fighters of crime" and freedom fighters equate to "fighters for freedom"? To be honest in our application of english and its grammatical constructs, we should be saying "freedom's fighters". In that sense we are saying fighters for freedom. There can be no ambiguity with that statement. Perhaps in my next post, I will put forth my opinions as to why such incorrections are being promulgated in a "generally" literate society such as ours.

Popular confusion

Here is a question to ponder,

Is it possible for a law to be fair despite being unjust or even unfair despite being just?

Consider this; the question of fairness deals primarily in the execution of a law. To be considered fair, a law should provide for being applied equally to all subjects. Now, the question of "being just" depends upon what society will tolerate as law (in a democratic society).