Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Constitution does not have an exception clause for emergencies in regards to 2nd amendment rights. Just like yelling fire in a crowded building is an exception for the 1st amendment, shooting people without just cause is where the 2nd amendment ends for an individual.
Those 10 tenets sound perfectly legitimate with me.
The only mistake the Oathkeepers are making is that their representatives have made themselves too public. I know of a few dozen Oathkeeper moles in several agencies I'll keep unnamed for their safety, and just don't understand why the group itself isn't entirely underground for their own protection.
I won't get into a debate about the 2nd Amendment, but I will point out that even the individual right to keep and bear arms isn't absolute. The Legislative and Judical branches have carved out legitmate exceptions many times over the years, for instance prohibiting the possession of fire arms to convicted violent criminals and incarcerated felons, and preventing you neighbor from owning, and using, an 8" howitzer. Not many would argue the legitimacy of those.
And, you should ask yourself this: IF the Oath Keeper's would be better off underground and out sight, what does that say about their agenda?
I won't get into a debate about the 2nd Amendment, but I will point out that even the individual right to keep and bear arms isn't absolute. The Legislative and Judical branches have carved out legitmate exceptions many times over the years, for instance prohibiting the possession of fire arms to convicted violent criminals and incarcerated felons, and preventing you neighbor from owning, and using, an 8" howitzer. Not many would argue the legitimacy of those.
They confiscated howitzers after Katrina? Those 'norleans folks sure are packin'. The exceptions cannot be arbitrary in nature.
Quote:
And, you should ask yourself this: IF the Oath Keeper's would be better off underground and out sight, what does that say about their agenda?
The same as it would with folks who resisted the Stasi, AVH, KGB, Iranian government, etc.
I'm of the opinion they have mules such as this in plain sight. Not too many people know about the ones who aren't. It's as it should be. The knowledge their are "sleeper cell" Oathkeepers protecting our rights when mules like this are scouted out does make me feel good about being an American. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
They confiscated howitzers after Katrina? Those 'norleans folks sure are packin'. The exceptions cannot be arbitrary in nature.
The same as it would with folks who resisted the Stasi, AVH, KGB, Iranian government, etc.
I'm of the opinion they have mules such as this in plain sight. Not too many people know about the ones who aren't. It's as it should be. The knowledge their are "sleeper cell" Oathkeepers protecting our rights when mules like this are scouted out does make me feel good about being an American. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
Yes, we'll have to disagree as I can never support any organization which identifies the government of the United States, or The People who control it through the exercise of their free rights, as an "enemy."
I've got a hundred dollar bill which says there's more to this story than is being reported on all those ultra-right web and blog sites.
As for Oath Keepers? Yes, they are extremist, so much so that even Bill O'Reilly said so when he had their founder, Stewart Rhodes, as a guest back in Feburary. When Rhodes started talking about the "un-Constitutional" seizure of guns in the aftermath of Katrina, O'Reilly pointed out that was an emergency situtation. Rhodes responded, "YOU say it was an emergency."
Guess what, Stewart...it WAS and emergency and the law allows many things during declared emergencies, whether you think it's constitutional or not.
They say they won't obey any of what they consider "un-Consitutional" orders and, in fact, have published their own Ten Commandments of sorts:
1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.
2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people.
3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants†or to subject them to military tribunal.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency†on a state.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace†or to “maintain control."
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.
That all sounds just grand, but the fact is that a good bit of the things they won't do are perfectly legal and have been determined by the Courts to be constitutionally acceptable. You may not agree with that, nor may I, but the fact remains that the Constitution protects the power of The People to make such laws through their elected representatives.
What Rhodes and Oath Keeper's are claiming is the absolute right to decide for themselves what is consitutional or not, completely disregarding established legal precedents and the rule of law.
Were we all to claim such a right, the Constitution itself would be worthless as we could all interpret it however we wanted.
The courts disagree with you and O'reilly...they already ruled the gu confiscations unconstitutional, but next to no one has gotten their guns back from corrupt new orleans...
I won't get into a debate about the 2nd Amendment, but I will point out that even the individual right to keep and bear arms isn't absolute. The Legislative and Judical branches have carved out legitmate exceptions many times over the years, for instance prohibiting the possession of fire arms to convicted violent criminals and incarcerated felons, and preventing you neighbor from owning, and using, an 8" howitzer. Not many would argue the legitimacy of those.
And, you should ask yourself this: IF the Oath Keeper's would be better off underground and out sight, what does that say about their agenda?
There's no law against owning a howitzer in most states. No federal law against it. It's regulated under the NFA; $200 tax and registration, but you can't be denied one unless a felon...
Yes, we'll have to disagree as I can never support any organization which identifies the government of the United States, or The People who control it through the exercise of their free rights, as an "enemy."
Where on their website or any paperwork do they refer to the United States as an enemy?
Yes, we'll have to disagree as I can never support any organization which identifies the government of the United States, or The People who control it through the exercise of their free rights, as an "enemy."
People acting under color of law in violation of civil rights are criminals (civil rights acts) and enemies of the people.
That tacky youtube presentation inserting pictures of other peoples children from mystery cases really hurt their credibility. The other serious allegations are???
The more you guys lie to sell the story... you're crying wolf too often and no one will come. You really do not want me on your jury. I'll treat you the same way I would a street punk because it's just how you've been acting.
The video was tacky but it wasn't an official oath keepers video either as far as I know.
I'll wait to see the "other allegations" and if there was any substance to them, but at bare minimum, listing membership in a lawful group this way as a reason for taking a child away is a violation of their civil rights.
If they included that I'm skeptical of anything they claim the parents did. Reminds me of the children getting taken from the 12 Tribes religious communities here in Vermont many years ago in violation of their rights, for reasons proven to be lies...
No affiliate has picked up on this yet, as it just broke today. We'll see what happens. I don't expect it to be on mainstream news (not even Fox), but perhaps the local guys will get at it. Please keep in mind the title says alleged.
"An Affidavit was produced that claimed an affiliation with a militia called Oath Keepers."
I'm suspecting that the 21 months of prior DCYF involvement, two previous neglect petitions, and standing TPR have a lot more to do with the removal. But, yeah, sure, it's just about the guy being some militia moron.
For edification, this is part of the motion:
5. The Rochester District Office of the DCYF and the Rochester Family Court has been involved for approximately 21 months with this family in a case involving two children of Stephanie Taylor; neglect petitions were filed on January 7, 2009 and a Termination of Parental Rights trial was recently concluded as to these two children and the parties await an order on that matter.
6. Because the family and its history are well known to both the staff at the Rochester District Office of DCYF and also to the Presiding Justice of the Rochester Family Court, the interests of justice argues for change of venue to the Rochester Family Division.
7. Mr. Irish was court ordered to attend Ending the Violence with Scott Hampton,however, to date, has not completed the program. The Epsom Police Department stated they were very familiar with Mr. Irish, as they have responded to multiple calls, which involved Mr. Irish and firearms, one of which resulted in a pending charge for possession of a concealed weapon without a permit. The Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the, "Oath Keepers," and had purchased serveral different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and a taser.
I'm suspecting that the 21 months of prior DCYF involvement, two previous neglect petitions, and standing TPR have a lot more to do with the removal. But, yeah, sure, it's just about the guy being some militia moron.
For edification, this is part of the motion:
5. The Rochester District Office of the DCYF and the Rochester Family Court has been involved for approximately 21 months with this family in a case involving two children of Stephanie Taylor; neglect petitions were filed on January 7, 2009 and a Termination of Parental Rights trial was recently concluded as to these two children and the parties await an order on that matter.
6. Because the family and its history are well known to both the staff at the Rochester District Office of DCYF and also to the Presiding Justice of the Rochester Family Court, the interests of justice argues for change of venue to the Rochester Family Division.
7. Mr. Irish was court ordered to attend Ending the Violence with Scott Hampton,however, to date, has not completed the program. The Epsom Police Department stated they were very familiar with Mr. Irish, as they have responded to multiple calls, which involved Mr. Irish and firearms, one of which resulted in a pending charge for possession of a concealed weapon without a permit. The Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the, "Oath Keepers," and had purchased serveral different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and a taser.
Listing their political beliefs and membership in a lawful group as a reason was a violation of their rights.
Second, Oath Keepers is not a militia. They lied.
Third, nothing illegal about the weapons.
Fourth, given my knowledge of multiple cases of police departments in NH harassing and filing false charges against people carrying guns...I'm skeptical there's any substance to that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
