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.
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.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Extra credit questions:
(a) Who wrote this?
(b) What is the name of the document?
Hint: It's not just a pretty speech. It's a law, as legal and binding as any other Federal law in the United States.
It is a general proposition.
It's a law, passed by the duly appointed lawmaking body of the time, the 2nd Continental Congress.
Quote:
It is direct to the generic "men".
Because that's who it applies to: Everyone in the jurisdiction of the United States.
Quote:
It has no specificity to the US
Keep dreaming.
Quote:
nor force of law
Were you about to name the subsequent duly-passed laws that repealed it? Perhaps I should point out that Leftist wet dreams and wishful thinking, don't qualify.
Quote:
or even good direction.
The common whine of leftists who don't like being told that the purpose of government is to protect our rights, and that when government becomes abusive to those rights we are expected to overthrow it. That just hits the leftists TOO close to home.
Quote:
It requires a long series of abuses and usurpations inflected upon the citizenry.
What government has been doing to us for the last decades is FAR more than the colonists ever had to deal with. They kicked out the government of the time (British king and parliament) over taxes at the 10 percent level.
Quote:
To suggest it has an applicability to the present tends to show the lack of rationality upon the part of the "to arms" types.
To suggest that it doesn't, shows the level of desperation and wishful thinking rife among the leftists and socialist Democrats who must violate the fundamental laws of the land to further their agenda.
The big-government crowd (in both parties) hate the idea that the Founding Fathers saw their kind coming more than 200 years ago, and set up firm and well-defined laws to prohibit the clear and present danger they represent to the country.
Unfortunately we haven't had the juevos to enforce those laws as the Founding Fathers intended - a situation which may change soon.
Or then again, perhaps you would like to be the first one through the door when they come to take my arms. You seem perfectly comfortable with the prospect of putting someone else in that position.
I for one, have never used the expression, "Water The Tree of Liberty"(which I find very inflammatory and the most thinly of veiled threats) nor have I ever advocated taking away any law abiding citizen's guns........ever. Where did you ever get such an idea that I want to take your's or anybody else's guns? You search my entire post history over the last 5 years and you will not find one....1......one post where I advocate, endorse or promote the taking away of any law abiding citizen's guns. But having run very close with the gun owning crowd for many, many years, I can attest honestly that there are many who own guns who are just bat-S#!t mean and crazy and I wouldn't go shooting at the range with them if they provided all the ammo for free. This is one of those things gun owners don't talk about much.
You posting that you hope I'm first through your door so you can kill me, qualifies as one of those bat-S#!t crazy Bastards I'm talking about. You want me to come through your door first, so you can blow my brains out. Why???? Because you perceive I'm not in lock step with your conception of what the 2nd. means??? I'd say you are the epitome of the itchy finger syndrome.
In fact I endorse the principle of all guns of all types being legal for possession by law abiding citizens but would advocate for licensing and safety training conducted by the NRA for all gun owners. I have started threads and made numerous posts on the concept.
You, like every other rabid right wing gun nut think that if someone isn't in lock-step in agreement with every aspect of your gun rights vision they are your enemy and want to take your guns. It just brings out the low forehead, knuckle-dragging quality of the shallow thinker.
Non criminals care because it turns them into felons.
The majority of guns owners to not follow the goings on in Sacramento of over 20 gun bills. Many of these bills will turn regular people who are going about their regular lives into felons. A ww2 vet with his old m1 carbine and 15 round magazine stashed away in the attack, felon. Regular guy who buys a glock 17 back in the 90's for home defense with a 17 round magazine, felon. Someone breaks into your home and steels your gun in your nightstand, you are now a criminal. You buy some ammo from your neighbor, you are now a criminal. You lose a gun and you don't tell the police, you are a criminal. You have a Remington 7400 hunting rifle that you don't register as an "assault weapon," you are now a criminal. You own a magazine that looks like it can hold more than 10 rounds, you are now a criminal.
That is just the laws being proposed this year, I does not include all the crap that has been passed the last 20 years.
I agree with your post and it makes the case very clearly. I for one do not agree with any of the new round of gun legislation coming out of Cali. I never did. It does make criminals out of law abiding citizens for technicalities and not for real crimes. But because I take great offense at those who call for and incite violence with the "Water The Tree of Liberty" crap, I get branded as some kind of anti-gunner. My only response in this thread was to call out those who would incite others to violence with such inflammatory postings.
Just a question: if you dislike San Diego' strict gun laws why don't you move to New Orleans or Dallas or Saint Louis or Birmingham?
They have lenient gun laws and they are safer than San Diego... oh wait... nevermind
So you are saying they should uproot themselves from where they live for years because the politicians are doing something clearly of their own ideology than any constructive thing for the city... that's why we call you liberals.. liberals...
I for one, have never used the expression, "Water The Tree of Liberty"(which I find very inflammatory and the most thinly of veiled threats) nor have I ever advocated taking away any law abiding citizen's guns........ever. Where did you ever get such an idea that I want to take your's or anybody else's guns? You search my entire post history over the last 5 years and you will not find one....1......one post where I advocate, endorse or promote the taking away of any law abiding citizen's guns. But having run very close with the gun owning crowd for many, many years, I can attest honestly that there are many who own guns who are just bat-S#!t mean and crazy and I wouldn't go shooting at the range with them if they provided all the ammo for free. This is one of those things gun owners don't talk about much.
You posting that you hope I'm first through your door so you can kill me, qualifies as one of those bat-S#!t crazy Bastards I'm talking about. You want me to come through your door first, so you can blow my brains out. Why???? Because you perceive I'm not in lock step with your conception of what the 2nd. means??? I'd say you are the epitome of the itchy finger syndrome.
In fact I endorse the principle of all guns of all types being legal for possession by law abiding citizens but would advocate for licensing and safety training conducted by the NRA for all gun owners. I have started threads and made numerous posts on the concept.
You, like every other rabid right wing gun nut think that if someone isn't in lock-step in agreement with every aspect of your gun rights vision they are your enemy and want to take your guns. It just brings out the low forehead, knuckle-dragging quality of the shallow thinker.
So now you are trying to sound like you are reasonable after attacking me like a rabid dog for quoting one of the forefathers. It is you who are the rabid nut job, verbally attacking people without having a clue what you are talking about.
It is not me that is looking for a fight, but the day some left wing nut jobs pass some law saying what is my right is no longer my right, you can bet that I will not lay down and take it like some coward afraid to stand for what I believe in.
So now you are trying to sound like you are reasonable after attacking me like a rabid dog for quoting one of the forefathers. It is you who are the rabid nut job, verbally attacking people without having a clue what you are talking about.
It is not me that is looking for a fight, but the day some left wing nut jobs pass some law saying what is my right is no longer my right, you can bet that I will not lay down and take it like some coward afraid to stand for what I believe in.
My position on the matter has remained consistent for the last 45 years. I haven't suddenly gone soft or reasonable.
If and when whomever comes after your's and my guns, I will stand side by side with you to deny them that opportunity. I do not believe in gun confiscation of any sort nor have I ever. I say to the gun grabbers, "Leave the guns alone. They are protected by the 2nd amendment. Put reasonable restrictions on the people who own them."
I still contend that "Watering the Tree of liberty" is inflammatory, seditious and malicious. One is basically saying that our nation must periodically be subjected to a bloody pogrom just to preserve our liberty. Since only right wing tea party advocates ever use this expression, who do you think they mean when they intend to spill the blood to water that tree?
Even you must see how offensive this is to those who feel that intense bloodshed is not a necessary component in effecting political change.
Non criminals care because it turns them into felons.
The majority of guns owners to not follow the goings on in Sacramento of over 20 gun bills. Many of these bills will turn regular people who are going about their regular lives into felons. A ww2 vet with his old m1 carbine and 15 round magazine stashed away in the attack, felon. Regular guy who buys a glock 17 back in the 90's for home defense with a 17 round magazine, felon. Someone breaks into your home and steels your gun in your nightstand, you are now a criminal. You buy some ammo from your neighbor, you are now a criminal. You lose a gun and you don't tell the police, you are a criminal. You have a Remington 7400 hunting rifle that you don't register as an "assault weapon," you are now a criminal. You own a magazine that looks like it can hold more than 10 rounds, you are now a criminal.
That is just the laws being proposed this year, I does not include all the crap that has been passed the last 20 years.
They dont care about facts, logic, reason, reality, or common sense, or how much liberty is usurped, or how many people are attack, robbed, raped, or murdered, all they care about is opinions, emotions and the bind trust of the state. they are sheep.
What insult? If you don't see the connection it is because you find it unpleasant and duck it. Just read a couple of the boasts on here on on the references cited. While not all gunnies have the problem a substantial subset do.
I actually support permissive concealed carry ala Nevada and such. I am not anti-second. But I am anti these idiots who are going to man the road blocks and put the Feds in their place. Pure unadulterated idiocy.
I doubt there will be a change to the second. There is too strong a minority against any change. So no I do not believe it will change making it stronger or weaker. So we live with the courts incorrect view...as agreed to by the vast conspiracy.
You are aware that is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, to keep government in its place. right? Why shouldn't we have that ability, lord knows we could not abuse any more then the Feds abuse their power.
Minority? you are aware their is about 100,000,000 to 150,000,000 gun owners in this nation.
As for "living with the courts incorrect view" I am sorry what? yeah that is what America was founded on, shutting up and looking the powers at be rule over your life, liberty, property, and unalienable rights, with no legal recourse, all the more reason why the Supreme Court should have its powers greatly limited.
So the opinions and views of 5 out of 9 lawyers Should have to the power to limit, alter, restrict, or abolish the freedoms, liberties, and Constitutional rights of the American people, along with out of control State Legislators can turn millions of the law abiding Americans in criminals for no other reason then living up to the words of the Bill Of Rights, AND WE ARE THE BAD GUYS?
If they can not obey and protect the Constitutions and Bill Of Rights, intend of injecting personal opinions and Ideologues they then Supreme Court as well as the state legislators should be arrested and tried on grounds of treason...
I wonder what would happen if lefties --- ooo especially scary Muslims, brown people and blacks -- suddenly started talking about their ammo stockpiles, the "tree of liberty," and the "threats" and "tyranny" from the "fascists" on the right.
Gun control legislation would pass fast enough to make our heads spin.
You are aware the Democrats passed gun laws that prevent freed blacks to own firearms right after the civil war right?
Fascists on the rights?
fas·cism noun \ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\
Definition of FASCISM
1
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2
: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality — J. W. Aldridge>
Funny, limiting the freedoms and rights of other people, all the while giving more power to the state, under the lie of public safety sounds like you lefties are the definition of Fascism.
You are aware that is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, to keep government in its place. right? Why shouldn't we have that ability, lord knows we could not abuse any more then the Feds abuse their power.
Minority? you are aware their is about 100,000,000 to 150,000,000 gun owners in this nation.
As for "living with the courts incorrect view" I am sorry what? yeah that is what America was founded on, shutting up and looking the powers at be rule over your life, liberty, property, and unalienable rights, with no legal recourse, all the more reason why the Supreme Court should have its powers greatly limited.
So the opinions and views of 5 out of 9 lawyers Should have to the power to limit, alter, restrict, or abolish the freedoms, liberties, and Constitutional rights of the American people, along with out of control State Legislators can turn millions of the law abiding Americans in criminals for no other reason then living up to the words of the Bill Of Rights, AND WE ARE THE BAD GUYS?
If they can not obey and protect the Constitutions and Bill Of Rights, intend of injecting personal opinions and Ideologues they then Supreme Court as well as the state legislators should be arrested and tried on grounds of treason...
I believe the purpose of the 2nd amendment was to provide the populace with the ability to resist the government. But the USSC does not agree. If the court had interpreted the law as written they would have ruled out all gun control laws. What part of "no law" did they not understand. However the grand conspiracy had already agreed that such an outcome was not acceptable...so they agree that you can have a gun for personal defense and that is about it.
I do not agree with the founding fathers but I do agree that is what they wrote. If the USSC had chosen to go that way we would then have had a very active dialog on the subject and would likely have ended up with a new version of the second. I have no idea whether it would have been very restrictive or less restrictive than the present interpretation. But no way the nation would have bought a weapons free for all..
As to the limits of the USSC propose away. I believe the right has already suggested an override and term limits. Don't hold your breath.
And yes if you buy into the idiocy of fighting off the feds you are a member of the BAD GUYS
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.
