U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Will the government become tyrannical?
Yes, it will. 46 68.66%
No, it will never ever become tyrannical. 13 19.40%
I don’t know. 8 11.94%
Voters: 67. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 06:12 AM
 
30,148 posts, read 16,641,289 times
Reputation: 14014

Advertisements

If the govt you're living under maintains a secret kill list, it might be tyrannical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 06:19 AM
 
Location: Northern Wisconsin
8,991 posts, read 7,822,842 times
Reputation: 15509
It will become mire tyranical the more Dems have power. Obamacare is the best example destrying free market choices and imposing what kind of healthcare plan they want you to buy, and then passing an individual mandate, forcing people to buy health insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 07:11 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
13,828 posts, read 9,933,657 times
Reputation: 9964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
If the govt you're living under maintains a secret kill list, it might be tyrannical.
The irony is that if they only target U.S. citizens, duly enrolled into FICA, and with open interest bearing bank accounts, they're home free. [See Ezekiel 18:13]
Stomping "Dead men walking" is not a violation... [Is that why they still "In God, We Trust"?]

. . .

Another irony - the republican form is still guaranteed according to the law on the books. So there are no grounds to "alter or abolish" the current collectivist / usurer regime. As long as you consent, no harm, no foul.
Of course, once you withdraw consent from usury, socialism, and democracy, keep a wary eye out for rogue servants who won't honor their oaths of office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 03:45 PM
 
Location: SGV
25,236 posts, read 9,847,947 times
Reputation: 9831
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
The irony is that if they only target U.S. citizens, duly enrolled into FICA, and with open interest bearing bank accounts, they're home free. [See Ezekiel 18:13]
Stomping "Dead men walking" is not a violation... [Is that why they still "In God, We Trust"?]

. . .

Another irony - the republican form is still guaranteed according to the law on the books. So there are no grounds to "alter or abolish" the current collectivist / usurer regime. As long as you consent, no harm, no foul.
Of course, once you withdraw consent from usury, socialism, and democracy, keep a wary eye out for rogue servants who won't honor their oaths of office.
You can't consent to something by sliding out of a vagina. Withdrawing consent from this paradigm is recognition that you can indeed consent by sliding out of a vagina or else you wouldn't need to withdrawal from any involuntary actions involving the State.

The irony of this has always been completely lost on you. You honestly believe that since you've signed some papers downtown the State recognizes you as free. Honestly, this is more psychotic than actually believing in the moral and logical paradigm of the State...which in fact doesn't even exist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:34 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
13,828 posts, read 9,933,657 times
Reputation: 9964
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
You can't consent to something by sliding out of a vagina. Withdrawing consent from this paradigm is recognition that you can indeed consent by sliding out of a vagina or else you wouldn't need to withdrawal from any involuntary actions involving the State.

The irony of this has always been completely lost on you. You honestly believe that since you've signed some papers downtown the State recognizes you as free. Honestly, this is more psychotic than actually believing in the moral and logical paradigm of the State...which in fact doesn't even exist.
I am not sure you mean what you are writing but let me rephrase it just to be sure.

You claim that I wrote that being born gives consent to being a citizen. Which I never did. But the 14th amendment appears to claim that. And since mandatory civic duties abrogate endowed rights, it is highly suspect that U.S. citizenship is limited in scope and application.

The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, militia, on the jury, etc." In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".

(If they’re not involuntary servitude, they MUST be voluntary. And the only parties obligated to perform mandatory civic duties are citizens. Ergo, citizenship MUST be voluntary.)

You claim that I wrote that signing some legal papers recognizes you as free. Which I never did. But if you sign any document in which you asserted that you were a U.S. citizen / U.S. resident, opened an account with FICA, and any other number of legal papers that you checked off [] U.S. citizen, yes, you have CONSENTED to be a citizen.
Of course, if FRAUD was used to induce that consent, you have the right to WITHDRAW CONSENT from their democracy, usury and socialism.

Feel free to verify or refute that American nationals / free inhabitants* domiciled upon private property within the united States of America retain all Creator endowed rights, natural rights, natural and personal liberty, absolute ownership of private property, inherent powers, privileges and immunities; and as free inhabitants domiciled upon their private property, have dominion over their private property. And that no government instituted to secure endowed rights can tax, regulate or infringe upon them.
(* aka non-citizens / non-residents)

No government instituted to secure endowed rights has the power to impose citizenship and its mandatory civic duties that abrogate endowed rights. . . and stay in compliance with the republican form of government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:48 AM
 
30,235 posts, read 15,711,081 times
Reputation: 20353
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
Will it? Do we expect that to happen?

Remember Trump, aka, literally Hitler, was elected and his administration is running concentration camps.
Lol.

Throughout history, most governments have become tyrannical at some point to some of its citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 02:40 PM
 
Location: SGV
25,236 posts, read 9,847,947 times
Reputation: 9831
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
I am not sure you mean what you are writing but let me rephrase it just to be sure.

You claim that I wrote that being born gives consent to being a citizen. Which I never did. But the 14th amendment appears to claim that. And since mandatory civic duties abrogate endowed rights, it is highly suspect that U.S. citizenship is limited in scope and application.

The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, militia, on the jury, etc." In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".

(If they’re not involuntary servitude, they MUST be voluntary. And the only parties obligated to perform mandatory civic duties are citizens. Ergo, citizenship MUST be voluntary.)

You claim that I wrote that signing some legal papers recognizes you as free. Which I never did. But if you sign any document in which you asserted that you were a U.S. citizen / U.S. resident, opened an account with FICA, and any other number of legal papers that you checked off [] U.S. citizen, yes, you have CONSENTED to be a citizen.
Of course, if FRAUD was used to induce that consent, you have the right to WITHDRAW CONSENT from their democracy, usury and socialism.

Feel free to verify or refute that American nationals / free inhabitants* domiciled upon private property within the united States of America retain all Creator endowed rights, natural rights, natural and personal liberty, absolute ownership of private property, inherent powers, privileges and immunities; and as free inhabitants domiciled upon their private property, have dominion over their private property. And that no government instituted to secure endowed rights can tax, regulate or infringe upon them.
(* aka non-citizens / non-residents)

No government instituted to secure endowed rights has the power to impose citizenship and its mandatory civic duties that abrogate endowed rights. . . and stay in compliance with the republican form of government.
There is no government. All your fictional scribblings aside it's just words on parchment that are not morally and logically binding under the very definitions you are espousing when it comes to "individuals", "rights", and "consent".

How does one properly consent to an agreement when the other party is a fictional collective void of rights therefore morally and logically incapable of securing said rights?

How does on properly consent to an agreement when they have a gun to their head? Consent requires that one be free from duress.

You can wail and pontificate all you want about having the government by the balls but what it boils down to is you are using their own rules to do it. When you do so, by the nature of the government itself, you are at least recognizing its legitimacy if not consenting to opt out. How one opts out of something they never opted into the first place is beyond me.

The difference between you and I is that I recognize that both of us are slaves and no amount of political mumbo jumbo will save either one of us when it comes to the State's duties having an adverse impact on us.

If you honestly believe you are void of the government's purview go right ahead and violate one of its rules, or if they randomly believe you've violated one of their rules and decide to persecute, and see what happens to you. Bring your SCOTUS rulings with you. They like a good laugh as they violate you to the bone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 02:52 PM
 
Location: Haiku
4,477 posts, read 2,685,491 times
Reputation: 6561
Quote:
Originally Posted by camaro69 View Post
Please read the US Constitution and learn.
Article 1 Section 9 has been interpreted by SCOTUS as giving the President the right to declare martial law. I would say that is pretty tyrannical. There are no checks and balances with it, it is entirely up to the President.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top