Our founding fathers were not conservative

There is nothing in The Constitution that grants Totalitarian Power either, Einstein. ;) :lol: Just work on getting the Government out of the crapper, before it self destructs. ;) Rambo. :) Serve Justice start there or forsake it at your own peril. Hurry too, I'm saving my pennies and coupons up for a Guillotine. Hurry up now... Chop-Chop... next in line... :lol: We Don't need no stinking badges! :lol:
Serve Justice, stop perverting it. There really is no way around that throughout time, throughout the world, everything ends up accounted for.
You do know that I am pro Constitution, pro rule of law and due process, right??? ....Just checking.

Um..aside from making no sense.

What's the point of this?

I made this post that there was nothing in the Constitution that supports the notion that it prescribes alternatives other then voting to make a change of government. I've back that up with sections of the document. What I am getting in return is completely ridiculous and absurd proclaimations about "our current administration" or "you haven't made your argument" and nothing that shows where my post was incorrect.

Read the document every once in a while...you might be surprised.

I've not even referenced the current administration. You are projecting. The only thing you have proven is that the Document is living when you want it to be, and literal when you want it to be, which is true only in your imagination.

Try again.

Because I've never said one thing or the other in this entire thread. Or in most of my posts.
 
Intense seems to think he is a constitutional Power Ranger with his boy wonder, bigrebcato, as his trusty boykick.

This is fun to read, but their philosophy has no relation to reality.

Are you here to have a discussion or are you here to trade insults?

You insult others and pull this crap? Listen, boy toy, back up.

Nothing in the Constitution says that a state can secede. The Civil War settled the matter militarily. The SCOTUS has settled it judicially.

You got a problem with that? Go talk to SCOTUS, not get mouthy with me.
 
In this day and age? Personal protection or sport.

Back then..it was to be part of the US military..

And it really doesn't matter much in any case. They would not be much use against the total might of the United States Armed Forces.

You totally lack understanding on the matter Sallow. We, unlike you, are not the property of the State, and don't have to raise our hands to ask permission to defend ourselves, when the State fails to do so. Do you still raise your hand for permission to pee? Grow up and learn responsibility. Self Defense is an Unalienable Right Sallow. Meditate on that.

You're all over the place..and still wrong. Personal self defense isn't in the Constitution either..but if you like..try and find it..and give me a "schoolin'".

Collective self-defense..however..is in the Constitution.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official


Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Bill of Rights Transcript

Back in the days of Enumerated Powers the Right of Self Defense would be considered a State Issue. The fact that you don't recognize it as an unalienable right, is very concerning Sallow. You obviously do not know what personal boundaries are. How would you then know when you are trespassing???
 
Intense seems to think he is a constitutional Power Ranger with his boy wonder, bigrebcato, as his trusty boykick.

This is fun to read, but their philosophy has no relation to reality.

Are you here to have a discussion or are you here to trade insults?

You insult others and pull this crap? Listen, boy toy, back up.

Nothing in the Constitution says that a state can secede. The Civil War settled the matter militarily. The SCOTUS has settled it judicially.

You got a problem with that? Go talk to SCOTUS, not get mouthy with me.

I haven't insulted anyone today in this thread jokey but I am willing keep it up.
 
Intense seems to think he is a constitutional Power Ranger with his boy wonder, bigrebcato, as his trusty boykick.

This is fun to read, but their philosophy has no relation to reality.

Are you here to have a discussion or are you here to trade insults?

You insult others and pull this crap? Listen, boy toy, back up.

Nothing in the Constitution says that a state can secede. The Civil War settled the matter militarily. The SCOTUS has settled it judicially.

You got a problem with that? Go talk to SCOTUS, not get mouthy with me.

Great Britain did not recognize the right of the American colonies to declare independence, either.

And yet . . . .
 
Are you here to have a discussion or are you here to trade insults?

You insult others and pull this crap? Listen, boy toy, back up.

Nothing in the Constitution says that a state can secede. The Civil War settled the matter militarily. The SCOTUS has settled it judicially.

You got a problem with that? Go talk to SCOTUS, not get mouthy with me.

I haven't insulted anyone today in this thread jokey but I am willing keep it up.

Mind your manners then.
 
Are you here to have a discussion or are you here to trade insults?

You insult others and pull this crap? Listen, boy toy, back up.

Nothing in the Constitution says that a state can secede. The Civil War settled the matter militarily. The SCOTUS has settled it judicially.

You got a problem with that? Go talk to SCOTUS, not get mouthy with me.

Great Britain did not recognize the right of the American colonies to declare independence, either.

And yet . . . .

Liability, you are dead right if you are suggesting military might alters events. But we are talking the document. Now if South Carolina got hold of a nuke and said to the US, "Back off," I imagine the US would back off. But we are talking about the document, are we not?
 
Last edited:
You insult others and pull this crap? Listen, boy toy, back up.

Nothing in the Constitution says that a state can secede. The Civil War settled the matter militarily. The SCOTUS has settled it judicially.

You got a problem with that? Go talk to SCOTUS, not get mouthy with me.

I haven't insulted anyone today in this thread jokey but I am willing keep it up.

Mind your manners then.

go **** yourself junior
 
Are you here to have a discussion or are you here to trade insults?

You insult others and pull this crap? Listen, boy toy, back up.

Nothing in the Constitution says that a state can secede. The Civil War settled the matter militarily. The SCOTUS has settled it judicially.

You got a problem with that? Go talk to SCOTUS, not get mouthy with me.

Great Britain did not recognize the right of the American colonies to declare independence, either.

And yet . . . .

And yet the Second Amendment exists...whoops...
 
You insult others and pull this crap? Listen, boy toy, back up.

Nothing in the Constitution says that a state can secede. The Civil War settled the matter militarily. The SCOTUS has settled it judicially.

You got a problem with that? Go talk to SCOTUS, not get mouthy with me.

Great Britain did not recognize the right of the American colonies to declare independence, either.

And yet . . . .

Liability, you are dead right if you are suggesting military might alters events. But we are talking the document. Now if South Carolina got hold of a nuke and said to the US, "Back off," I imagine the US would back off. But we are talking about the document, are we not.

A docuent is nothing but a piece of paper with words written on it. It's only worth something if you are willing to back it up.
 
You insult others and pull this crap? Listen, boy toy, back up.

Nothing in the Constitution says that a state can secede. The Civil War settled the matter militarily. The SCOTUS has settled it judicially.

You got a problem with that? Go talk to SCOTUS, not get mouthy with me.

Great Britain did not recognize the right of the American colonies to declare independence, either.

And yet . . . .

Liability, you are dead right if you are suggesting military might alters events. But we are talking the document. Now if South Carolina got hold of a nuke and said to the US, "Back off," I imagine the US would back off. But we are talking about the document, are we not.

Since there is nothing that says it still...really says a mouthfull doesn't it?
 
Great Britain did not recognize the right of the American colonies to declare independence, either.

And yet . . . .

Liability, you are dead right if you are suggesting military might alters events. But we are talking the document. Now if South Carolina got hold of a nuke and said to the US, "Back off," I imagine the US would back off. But we are talking about the document, are we not.

A docuent is nothing but a piece of paper with words written on it. It's only worth something if you are willing to back it up.

That offers nothing to this discussion, bigrebnc. We are governed by that piece of paper, and when the Southern assholes ignored it, nearly 700,000 American soldiers and civilians died by the actions of other Americans. We live by the document so that we don't die by man's emotions.
 
Our fathers were Not conservative. But hidden Within them was a very secret organization today believed to be "conspiracy theory". If you Finished High school you may very well know that George Washington was a Mason A free mason. there is the eye on our dollar the owl the 666 on the pyramid and last but not least George WASHINGTON.v our founding fathers were not conservative. but surely have a great history. explain tha:clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::lol:t
 
Liability, you are dead right if you are suggesting military might alters events. But we are talking the document. Now if South Carolina got hold of a nuke and said to the US, "Back off," I imagine the US would back off. But we are talking about the document, are we not.

A docuent is nothing but a piece of paper with words written on it. It's only worth something if you are willing to back it up.

That offers nothing to this discussion, bigrebnc. We are governed by that piece of paper, and when the Southern assholes ignored it, nearly 700,000 American soldiers and civilians died by the actions of other Americans. We live by the document so that we don't die by man's emotions.

So when are you going to offer something to the discussion? Opinions count for half a point Facts give you full credit.
We are governed by that piece of paper? That piece of paper doesn't mean anything to the democrats in the government. They have been on record saying that document doesn't matter. To them it is a way to legaly enslave the people of this country.

That document only has value when both party all elected officals do not use it to advance their agenda, or enslave the peoplke of this country.

Until then I will hold to the second Amendment as my rule of law.
 
Second amendment rights are part of it, a very small part of it. I have properly parsed the discussion. We follow the Constitution as interpreted by SCOTUS and accepted by the populace, because the alternative is unacceptable. Believe as you will, as your right as an American, but you will follow the law or suffer the consequence.
 
"I am a mortal enemy to arbitrary government and unlimited power. I am naturally very jealous for the rights and liberties of my country, and the least encroachment of those invaluable privileges is apt to make my blood boil."
--Ben Franklin

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/
 
15th post
What the Framers said about our Second Amendment
Rights to Keep and Bear Arms



"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
"Whereas civil-rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
-- Tench Coxe, in Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.
-- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ... "
-- Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)
"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
--James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46
"To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws."
--John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."
--Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
--Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
"Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it."
--Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356
"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]
"The right of the people to keep and bear ... arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country ..."
-- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789
"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty .... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."
-- Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment, I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789
" ... to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
-- George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380
" ... but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights ..."
-- Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29
"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
-- Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836
"The great object is, that every man be armed ... Every one who is able may have a gun."
-- Patrick Henry, Elliot, p.3:386
"O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone ..."
-- Patrick Henry, Elliot p. 3:50-53, in Virginia Ratifying Convention demanding a guarantee of the right to bear arms
"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them."
-- Zacharia Johnson, delegate to Virginia Ratifying Convention, Elliot, 3:645-6
"Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms ... The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible."
-- Hubert H. Humphrey, Senator, Vice President, 22 October 1959
"The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpation of power by rulers. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally ... enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
-- Joseph Story, Supreme Court Justice, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, p. 3:746-7, 1833
" ... most attractive to Americans, the possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave, it being the ultimate means by which freedom was to be preserved."
-- James Burgh, 18th century English Libertarian writer, Shalhope, The Ideological Origins of the Second Amendment, p.604
"The right [to bear arms] is general. It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the laws, are liable to the performance of military duty, and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon.... f the right were limited to those enrolled, the purpose of the guarantee might be defeated altogether by the action or the neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check. The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose. But this enables the government to have a well regulated militia; for to bear arms implies something more than mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them in a way that makes those who keep them ready for their efficient use; in other words, it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms, observing in so doing the laws of public order."
-- Thomas M. Cooley, General Principles of Constitutional Law, Third Edition [1898]
"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress ... to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.... "
--Samuel Adams
Bear Arms
 
Second amendment rights are part of it, a very small part of it. I have properly parsed the discussion. We follow the Constitution as interpreted by SCOTUS and accepted by the populace, because the alternative is unacceptable. Believe as you will, as your right as an American, but you will follow the law or suffer the consequence.

The second amendment is the teeth to the Constitution. Without the second amendment you would not have any rights just privileges granted by the government.
 
Those Who Would Repeal
That Right



"The worst crime against working people is a company which fails to operate at a profit."
-- Samuel Gompers

"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles ... that we are unable to think about reality."
-- Bill Clinton, USA Today, 11 March 93, pg. 2A
"The last time I checked, the Constitution said 'of the people, by the people and for the people'. That's what the Declaration of Independence says."
-- Reuters News Agency
** Note: actually those words are in neither of those documents, but part of The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln
"We are taking the law and bending it as far as we can to capture a whole new class of guns [to ban]"
-- Jose Cerda, Los Angeles Times, 22 Oct. 1997, Mr. Cerda was named as a White House Official who specializes in gun control
"Gun registration is not enough."
-- Janet Reno, U.S. Attorney General, Associated Press 10 Dec 1993
"I want to make it as hard as possible. Gun owners would have to be evaluated by how they scored on written and firing tests, and have to pass the tests in order to own a gun. And I would tax the guns, bullets and the license itself very heavily."
-- Jocelyn Elders, U.S. Surgeon General, Mother Jones magazine, Jan/Feb '94
"Armas para que?" ("Guns, for what?")
-- Fidel Castro, a response to a Cuban citizens who said the people might need to keep their guns, after Castro announced strict gun control in Cuba
"I have made it considerably tougher for residents to get handgun permits."
-- Joseph McNamara, Police Chief, San Jose, CA, in his book Safe and Sane, 1984
"The second article of amendment (Second Amendment) to the Constitution of the United States is repealed."
-- U.S. House Joint Resolution 438 introduced 11 March 1992 by Congressman Owens, D-NY
" ... we could tax them [firearms] out of existence."
-- Daniel Patrick Moynihan, U.S. Senator, Washington Post, 4 Nov 93
"If it were up to me we'd ban them all [firearms]."
-- Mel Reynolds, U.S. Congressman, CNN Crossfire, 9 Dec 93
"We're going to have to take this one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily - given the political realities - going to be very modest. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal - total control of all guns- is going to take time ... The final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition - except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs and licensed gun collectors - totally illegal."
-- Nelson T. Shields III, Founder of Handgun Control, Inc., New Yorker Magazine, p. 57-58, 26 Jul 1976
"There is no personal right to be armed for private purposes unrelated to the service in a well regulated militia."
-- Sarah Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control, Inc., Richmond Times-Dispatch, 6 Jun 97, pg. 6
"We must reverse this psychology (of needing guns for home defense). WE can do it by passing a law that says anyone found in possession a handgun except a legitimate officer of the law goes to jail-period!"
-- Carl Rowan, Washington DC Syndicated Columnist, 1981 article
" ... as long as authorities leave this society awash in drugs and guns, I will protect my family."
-- Carl Rowan, 1988 article titled "At Least They're Not Writing My Obituary"
"Men possess handguns in order to compensate for sexual dysfunction."
-- Dr. Joyce Brothers, Psychiatrist, TV personality
** her husband is among NYC elite that has been issued a permit to carry a concealed handgun
"Those now possessing weapons and ammunition are at once to turn them over to the local police authority. Firearms and ammunition found in a Jew's possession will be forfeited to the government without compensation ... Whoever willfully or negligently violates the provisions ... will be punished with imprisonment and a fine.
-- Nazi Law, Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons, 11 Nov 1938, German Minister of the Interior
Those who would repeal that right
 
The genius of American liberty is not the 2nd Amendment. If it were, the whiskey farmers of PA would have run off the national army in 1794, or the states of New England would have seceded in 1815. The genius, of course, is that that military subordinates itself to civilian control. Douglas MacArthur's greatest service to the country was stepping down immediately when relieved by Truman in 1951. If ever the military decides to take control, 2nd Amendment rights merely means many Americans will die before the military crushes out rebellion. That's why civil discourse among our political factions secure our liberties tightly.
 
Back
Top Bottom