Not Founding Fathers, Founding Punks

[JakeStarkey]

One of the questions that might arise in a history class is, did the framers carry out the principles of the Declaration of 1776 when they wrote the 1787 Constitution, and then, of course, the evidence? Always the evidence.

One instructor I knew pointed that the Spirit of 1787 and the Constitution was a reaction to the Spirit of 1776 and the Declaration of Independence. She had her students write on the theme of "Daniel Shays: Patriot or Rebel", after having them study his life. Very enlightening.

 

[regent]

Contemporary interpretation of the 2nd amendment has led to tragedy today in the mean streets of Chicago and LA, something the founding fathers could not have foreseen.

Widespread gun or weapon ownership was common in Ancient Rome and from there forward. We have the right to be armed to protect ourselves against liberal government, and only secondarily to protect ourselves against common criminals.

As a liberal you will lack the IQ to understand that the Constitution was only designed to protect us from government. In fact, the great fear was that if government were given the power to protect our right to bear arms it would instead use that power to take away our right to bear arms.

Thats is why the Bill of Rights was not included. Welcome to your first lesson in American History.

The preamble of the Constitution explains why the Constitution was created. Can you point out where it says the Constitution is designed to protect us from government?
The purpose of the Second Amendment is also written into the Second Amendment, "a well organized militia being necessary to the security of a free state..., that's free state. To go beyond what is written is then interpreting the Constitution, and nowhere in the Constitution is it written that citizens have the power to interpret and apply the Constitution.

 

[Auteur]

Contemporary interpretation of the 2nd amendment has led to tragedy today in the mean streets of Chicago and LA, something the founding fathers could not have foreseen.

Widespread gun or weapon ownership was common in Ancient Rome and from there forward. We have the right to be armed to protect ourselves against liberal government, and only secondarily to protect ourselves against common criminals.

As a liberal you will lack the IQ to understand that the Constitution was only designed to protect us from government. In fact, the great fear was that if government were given the power to protect our right to bear arms it would instead use that power to take away our right to bear arms.

Thats is why the Bill of Rights was not included. Welcome to your first lesson in American History.

Ah yes, the much noted paranoia of the backwoods American, who fears the city slicker is going to come and steal his squirrel gun, or whose yet, make him pay taxes.

You will note the term "militia" used in the constitution. This comes from the same root as is in "military", which is commonly accepted to be that branch of government concerned with armed defense of the nation. This made sense at the time, and it does now. What does not make sense is to sell handguns to emotionally unstable kids at gun shows, and then to have the results show up in lurid headlines a few weeks down the road.

Even if we were to take the gun-nuts thesis of protection from government seriously, it stlll would be a non-starter. Ask someone around you who has served in the army how long it would take for a modern military to disarm a bunch of civilians with hanguns and rifles. Widespread gun ownership may stoke the perceived John Wayne image of a few inmature individuals, but its only real effect is widespread tragedy.

And if you are referring to the British Bill of Rights of 1689, it was one of the major sources of inspiration for the US colonists when framing the constution, among others.

And this is our second lesson, isn't it?

 

[regent]

Contemporary interpretation of the 2nd amendment has led to tragedy today in the mean streets of Chicago and LA, something the founding fathers could not have foreseen.

Widespread gun or weapon ownership was common in Ancient Rome and from there forward. We have the right to be armed to protect ourselves against liberal government, and only secondarily to protect ourselves against common criminals.

As a liberal you will lack the IQ to understand that the Constitution was only designed to protect us from government. In fact, the great fear was that if government were given the power to protect our right to bear arms it would instead use that power to take away our right to bear arms.

Thats is why the Bill of Rights was not included. Welcome to your first lesson in American History.

Ah yes, the much noted paranoia of the backwoods American, who fears the city slicker is going to come and steal his squirrel gun, or whose yet, make him pay taxes.

You will note the term "militia" used in the constitution. This comes from the same root as is in "military", which is commonly accepted to be that branch of government concerned with armed defense of the nation. This made sense at the time, and it does now. What does not make sense is to sell handguns to emotionally unstable kids at gun shows, and then to have the results show up in lurid headlines a few weeks down the road.

Even if we were to take the gun-nuts thesis of protection from government seriously, it stlll would be a non-starter. Ask someone around you who has served in the army how long it would take for a modern military to disarm a bunch of civilians with hanguns and rifles. Widespread gun ownership may stoke the perceived John Wayne image of a few inmature individuals, but its only real effect is widespread tragedy.

And if you are referring to the British Bill of Rights of 1689, it was one of the major sources of inspiration for the US colonists when framing the constution, among others.

And this is our second lesson, isn't it?

Our founders were very clear about guns, gentlemen killed with guns and in the prescribed way of gentlemen, they fought duels, gentlemen duels.
I have posted a couple of time my experience as an MP. We trained to put down any challenge to any part of our government. Would we have shot civilians, and that answer is in our history, starting with the Whiskey Rebellion and George Washington and ending with Kent State. In between there are a number of examples including the biggie, the Civil War.

 

[numan]

Widespread gun or weapon ownership was common in Ancient Rome and from there forward.

I hope, Edward, that your error here was a lapsus calami [or, in the Internet Age, perhaps one should say "lapsus muris"]. · ·

I would hate to think that your knowledge of history is so deficient that you imagine the ancient Romans had guns !!!

It was very important for the Romans to own weapons, but certainly not to protect themselves from government!! -- that is a notion citizens of the Roman Republic would have found incomprehensible -- at least, until the usurpations of Marius and Sulla began the process of the collapse of the Republic.

They owned weapons because a Roman citizen could serve in the Roman army only if he provided his own weapons -- up until the military innovations of the afore mentioned Marius.

The same, of course, was generally true of American colonial militias. The incompetent, financially insolvent government set up by the Insurrectionary Terrorists could not pay for or provide weapons for state militias. That is the reason why the coup leaders wrote their Second Amendment.
.

 

[Mushroom]

Thomas Paine: He is believed to be a large part of the inspiration of The Declaration of Independence when he was 37 years old. Pro-revolutionary author of Common Sense.

And only emigrated to the colonies from England 2 years prior, did not sign the Declaration.

James Madison: He was only 25 in 1776. He is considered the “Father of the Constitution” and the key champion of The Bill Of Rights. He collaborated with John Jay and Alexander Hamilton to produce The Federalist Papers.

Also did not sign, he did however serve in the Virginia Legislature, and was critical in Religious Freedom clauses in the Virginia Constitution, as well as the same in the Bill of Rights in our own Constitution.

John Jay: He was 31 at the signing of The Declaration of Independence even though he didn’t sign it. He wrote many of the Federalist Papers and was the first Supreme Court Chief Justice.

He also attempted to eliminate slavery in the new country, trying many times to have it outlawed. He was however able to get the Emancipation Act passed in New York, eliminating slavery in that state.

Alexander Hamilton: A mere 21 years of age during the signing of The Declaration of Independence. (It is believed that) He was the bastard son of a prostitute. He wrote many of the Federalist Papers and helped define the nation’s financial system.

Wow, really? Actually he was born to Rachel Faucette, who was married to another man. She was not a prostitute, simply married to somebody else at the time he was born. His parents never married, but they still spent the rest of their lives together in a common-law marriage.

John Adams is rather an interesting character I always found. A lawyer and struggling farmer, he actually defended the British Soldiers who stood trial for the Boston Massacre. He was able to get 6 of the 8 accused acquitted, and the other 2 sentences for manslaughter instead of murder.

 

[Katzndogz]

They were actually middle aged. At 10 a boy was expected to carry a gun and hunt. Girls married upon menstruation. The average lifespan was 36 years old, so most of the Founders were past middle age.

 

[regent]

They were actually middle aged. At 10 a boy was expected to carry a gun and hunt. Girls married upon menstruation. The average lifespan was 36 years old, so most of the Founders were past middle age.

Many children died at birth or soon after, and that high infant mortality rate tended to reduce the average life span rates. A number of adults getting past those early years lived relatively long life spans. Another factor for those in government was the long and difficult travel times. Many elderly simply chose not to be in government because of the long travel times and long periods away from home.

 

[numan]

Thomas Paine [in a letter to George Washington] :
"As to you, sir, treacherous in private friendship and a hypocrite in public life, the world will be puzzled to decide whether you are an apostate or an impostor -- whether you have abandoned good principles or whether you ever had any."

John Jay :
"The people who own the country ought to govern it."

Roger Sherman :
"The people should have as little to do as may be about the government."

Elbridge Gerry [the eponomous source of the political evil of gerrymandering] :
"(Democracy is) the worst of all political evils."

Alexander Hamilton :
"The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. Give, therefore, to the (rich and well-born) a distinct, permanent share in the government. They will check the unsteadiness of the (mass of the people)."

Thomas Jefferson :
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

John Adams [in a letter to Thomas Jefferson] :
"Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been on the point of breaking out, "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!"

Compare these corrupt terrorists with one of their opponents in the Home Country and his wise words :

"When the people contend for their liberty, they seldom get anything for their victory but new masters."
---George Saville, Lord Halifax
.

 

[kiwiman127]

A little FYI, the average life expectancy 1776 in America was around 35 years old. So being in your thirties was considered old.

http://www.mineralseducationcoalition.org/pdfs/minerals1776vstoday.pdf
What was the life expectancy in 1776

 

[LA RAM FAN]

with this police state we are living in now.

100% absurd and stupid of course!! Are you afraid to give us your best example of this "police state" you are talking about? OF course you are.

we dont live ina apolce state? Now thats funny..

you want examples? thats simple.police are tazering people for the tinniest little things all over the country now,the NSA is arresting people just for saying things on the net like Obama should be jailed as a traiter on facebook and you obviously are not not aware of the demonstration that went on in chicago a few months ago where the police used billy clubs and beat up on innocent women in the crowds just for peacefully protesting NATO's occupation in the middle east.

the only one here that is afraid is YOU,afraid to look at the facts. Oh and Obomination,priased their gestapo nazi tactics in an address speech as well.yeah great free country we live in with all kinds of freedom of speech as well.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

One important thing that was spelled out, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.". I don't want to get into the the whole "creator" thing, but rather, the "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness", and "created equal".
When the founders said, "created equal", they knew that didn't mean everybody was equal in all things. Not everybody has the same intelligence level, or skill-set or work ethic, or a multitude of other things. That is why they said pursuit of happiness......Not equality of outcome. There was no guarantee that simply being a US citizen resulted in one being successful and happy, just the guarantee that one had the opportunity to do so based upon his own actions. In my opinion, we seem to have drifted far from that sort of belief, that it is up to the individual to pursue. And sometimes that means failure. It is not incumbent upon me, you or anybody else to provide happiness to another that either fails to seek it on their own, or fails to achieve it when they do seek it.

Wonder why Jefferson changed Locke's "property" to pursuit of happiness?

too stupid!! there is no evidence that it was Locke's property!! Grow up. In any case he said the pursuit of property or happiness not the entitlement to property or happiness.

"That the “pursuit of happiness” is an inalienable right—one that cannot be given away—and that governments have been tasked to protect it suggests a relationship between government and humanity’s moral ends in tension, if not in outright contradiction, with modern liberalism. It seems to assume an objective moral order from which a person may not alienate himself."

why dont you stop telling people they need to grow up just because you dont understand whats going on in the country?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

with this police state we are living in now.

100% absurd and stupid of course!! Are you afraid to give us your best example of this "police state" you are talking about? OF course you are.

Well, at any one time, the USA has between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 people in its Prison Gulag System -- depending on how you define "in the system." That is a percentage of population far more than in any other country -- including modern Russia and China.

On the bright side, Stalin had more than three million people in his gulags -- so I suppose one can say that the USA is twice as good as Stalin's Russia. · ·

.

so much for the laughable statement of not living in a police state.

 

[numan]

'

It would appear that US police have become militarized, Gestapoid robots, while in Canada they are still human beings.

I look forward to someone posting a photograph of US police in a large American city behaving as decently as the Canadians, but I will not hold my breath.

.

 

[Mushroom]

Thomas Paine [in a letter to George Washington] :
"As to you, sir, treacherous in private friendship and a hypocrite in public life, the world will be puzzled to decide whether you are an apostate or an impostor -- whether you have abandoned good principles or whether you ever had any."

This one jumps out at me, and I love how somebody on the internet can just throw out random quotes with no context.

Ever the lover of revolution, Mr. Paine left to go to France in the midst of Revolution after becoming the "spiritualist" of the American Revolution. Of course, this was also after he was expelled from his position by Congress. During the time between the US and French revolutions he spent his time writing (and loosing money), trying to sell a new bridge design, even going back to England. But when the French Revolution started, he rushed to Paris.

Using his "honorary French Citizenship" that was given to him for his writings, he was even able to get onto several political counsels, and helped draft one of the Constitutions of Revolutionary France. And at the same time, he was tried of sedition in England and could now no longer return to his hone nation.

And during the worst of The Terror, he had antagonized Mr. Robespierre, evicted from all political appointments, then arrested. Now his "honorary French citizenship" quickly vanished, and he tried to get them to release him to the US (and not to the UK where he was already a criminal). The US Foreign Minister in his opinion did not do enough to help safeguard his safety, and Mr. Paine was sentenced to be executed.

Fortunately for him however, Mr. was arrested and had his own personal invitation with The Royal Barber, so he was able to remain in jail long enough for President Washington's Foreign Minister (one James Monroe) to petition for his release, which was granted.

But rather then return to the US, Mr. Paine once again got involved with the Revolution, rejoining committees, and even meeting with Mr. Bonaparte.

What you posted was an "open letter" to President Washington, stating that he had conspired with people in France to try and have him imprisoned and executed.

I welcome people to actually learn about the history of Mr. Paine, and even read his letter and not just take a single quote without any context whatsoever.

Thomas Paine / Letter to Geroge Washington -- 1796 -- Part 1 of 2

 

[regent]

That's right, they were men in the prime of their lives and they risked everything including their lives and fortunes to create a government truly of and by the people for the first time in human history. Wonderful men.

Of and for white land holding males to be exact. Roughly the same situation as prevailed in Britain at the time.

ah but our genius founders deliberately set in motion the process that freed billions all around the world when they fired the shot heard around the world. Indeed, Jefferson's first draft talked more about slavery than about taxes. The latest beneficiaries are the 1.4 billion in China who just took a huge step toward freedom thanks to our genius founders who in an instant transformed life on this planet forever by seeking a revolution to limit government or to grant us freedom from big liberal government.

Welcome to your first lesson in American History.

So why did Jefferson talk about slavery in his first drafts?

 

[Katzndogz]

Thomas Paine [in a letter to George Washington] :
"As to you, sir, treacherous in private friendship and a hypocrite in public life, the world will be puzzled to decide whether you are an apostate or an impostor -- whether you have abandoned good principles or whether you ever had any."

John Jay :
"The people who own the country ought to govern it."

Roger Sherman :
"The people should have as little to do as may be about the government."

Elbridge Gerry [the eponomous source of the political evil of gerrymandering] :
"(Democracy is) the worst of all political evils."

Alexander Hamilton :
"The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. Give, therefore, to the (rich and well-born) a distinct, permanent share in the government. They will check the unsteadiness of the (mass of the people)."

Thomas Jefferson :
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

John Adams [in a letter to Thomas Jefferson] :
"Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been on the point of breaking out, "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!"

Compare these corrupt terrorists with one of their opponents in the Home Country and his wise words :

"When the people contend for their liberty, they seldom get anything for their victory but new masters."
---George Saville, Lord Halifax
.

For every quote given (out of context) there are three to support what moral and religious men the Founders were. John Adams said that the Constitution was only for a moral and religious people. It was wholly inadequate for any other.

Thomas Jefferson though, was reassuring the Danbury Baptists that government would never interfere in their religion and that has been perverted ever since. By his own words, Jefferson was a Christian.


"To the corruptions of Christianity I am indeed, opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence; and believing he never claimed any other.

 

[numan]

What you posted was an "open letter" to President Washington, stating that he had conspired with people in France to try and have him imprisoned and executed.

George Washington was such a skunk, wasn't he?

But then, what can you expect from a wheeler-dealer land speculator and terrorist insurrectionary?

.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

'

It would appear that US police have become militarized, Gestapoid robots, while in Canada they are still human beings.

I look forward to someone posting a photograph of US police in a large American city behaving as decently as the Canadians, but I will not hold my breath.

.

Time to do what americans said to do and many were wise to do when we had the vietnam war.flee to canada.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

with this police state we are living in now.

100% absurd and stupid of course!! Are you afraid to give us your best example of this "police state" you are talking about? OF course you are.

we dont live ina apolce state? Now thats funny..

you want examples? thats simple.police are tazering people for the tinniest little things all over the country now,the NSA is arresting people just for saying things on the net like Obama should be jailed as a traiter on facebook and you obviously are not not aware of the demonstration that went on in chicago a few months ago where the police used billy clubs and beat up on innocent women in the crowds just for peacefully protesting NATO's occupation in the middle east.

the only one here that is afraid is YOU,afraid to look at the facts. Oh and Obomination,priased their gestapo nazi tactics in an address speech as well.yeah great free country we live in with all kinds of freedom of speech as well.

I see our resident troll Ed has run off seeing he was confronted with pesky facts from this post of mine and Numans that we live in a police state.rather than be mature and admit he has been brainwashed "which we all were at one time,only difference is we have been able to be mature and admit that we were," rather than being mature and admitting it,since he is cornered,he ran off.