View Full Version : So Much for Free Speech...
Submariner
10-26-07, 17:47
Hawkeye gave me the heads up on this:
House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill (http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682)
GovTrack: H.R. 1955: Text of Legislation (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1955)
(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
Freedom of speech, whats that? It's gone...
(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.
Any one else see problems here?
The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.
From the Founder of Another Country:
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. James Madison
That quote by James Madison was the first thing that came to my mind as well.
KintlaLake
10-26-07, 20:23
Six "nay" votes.
Six.
At least now we know what it takes to build a bipartisan consensus.:rolleyes:
From my state, only one "nay"...(drum roll)...Dennis Kucinich.
Notable "no vote": Ron Paul. Out campaigning, perhaps?
safeways1217
10-26-07, 22:03
Unnintended Consequenses.
I guess under the new legislation I would have just committed a crime. Mother Freedom is choking from the stranglehold they are putting on her. How long before she is beyond help and we are left orphans with no options save those offered us by the ruling party elite.
sw1217
Pray to God Bush vetos that legislation or we may all be arrested one day for attending a damn NRA meeting! Life Member Forever!
No good can come from this...
Oh, by the way you can thank that piece of shit Ted Kennedy for this legislation, he was the author. You are right, no good can come from this.
How about it you LEs? Would like to enforce these on your fellow citisens that pay taxes to support you to "Serve And Protect" us? WE THE PEOPLE?
How about it you LEs? Would like to enforce these on your fellow citisens that pay taxes to support you to "Serve And Protect" us? WE THE PEOPLE?
What? Dont bring that drivel in here like we're mindless minions. Where the fu*k do you get off?
Save that stuff for GD on TOS, slick.
That attitude really pisses me off.
This is just another small step towards a worker's paradise, Comrades.
Canonshooter
10-27-07, 08:45
Jury Nullification (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification)
I have written my Senators giving my thoughts on this. Their replies should be fun to read. :( With the vote given by the House being so one sided it seems like the Senate would go the same way.
Looks like another way to encroach on the freedom of the citizens as well as a way to add some more government spending to the budget as well.
HolyRoller
10-27-07, 13:16
Gramps, this LEO will not enforce any unconstitutional law. In the US, we swear allegiance not to a king, president, emperor, nation, political party, or even God himself--we promise to support, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, so help us God, and only then do we enforce any laws not inconsistent with the Constitution.
Any organization in my AO caught promoting violent change or overthrow of the government, or planning violence against the innocent, is committing a fistful of felonies under the laws we already have. The liberal solution is, yup, pass some more laws. In the liberal world, there's no law and order, just way too much law and too little order.
Thanks, Holyrlr, That’s what I wanted. A well put response without profanity. I just wanted to know the other side of this.
I was not intending to push someone’s buttons to react, just respond.
Thanks again. You shed a good light on it for me.
I apologize for offending others.
Any organization in my AO caught promoting violent change or overthrow of the government,............
Interesting..... My oath when I went into the military, was to the Constitution, NOT the govt.
"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-Samuel Adams
"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...."
-Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist, No.28
"Our safety, our liberty depends on preserving the Constitution of the United States as our fathers made it inviolate. We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution"
-Abraham Lincoln
Most importantly.......
"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".
Declaration of Independance
HolyRoller
10-27-07, 16:19
Good catch--but since the laws against violent overthrow of the government are not inconsistent with the Constitution, then those laws get enforced on my shift.
The quotes from Sam Adams, Abe Lincoln, Al Hamilton, and the Declaration of Independence are not in the Constitution.
Submariner
10-27-07, 16:50
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the
Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth.
The Declaration of Independence founded the nation. See reference to twelfth year of Independence. Think charter (Declaration) of corporation and by-laws (first Articles of Confederation, then Constitution).
To separate the two is imprudent, HolyRoller. That's why the Supreme Court ducks some issues calling them "political questions." They get settled by force of arms. Hence the Second Amendment. You do support the right of the people to keep and bear arms, right, HolyRoller?
Submariner
10-27-07, 16:57
It's like the President said, "It's just a goddamned piece of paper."
HolyRoller understands Mao's dictum that "Political power comes from the barrel of a gun." On his shift.
How about when your shift is over?
If this legislation were in force back then, this guy would be in BIG trouble. Oops, my bad. He WAS in BIG trouble.
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.
This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty towards the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth -- to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House?
Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation -- the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motives for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?
No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer on the subject? Nothing.
We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.
Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.
Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope.
If we wish to be free -- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending -- if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak -- unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?
Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.
The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable -- and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, "Peace! Peace!" -- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!
Patrick Henry - March 23, 1775
KintlaLake
10-27-07, 17:11
My oath when I went into the military, was to the Constitution, NOT the govt.
That's also the difference between a patriot and a partisan.
"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." -Samuel Adams
Remind me, Hawkeye...exactly when did that train leave the station?:rolleyes: ;)
Was it before this (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21490838/)? :rolleyes: Vain and aspiring men, indeed.
This work received overwhelming, bi-partisan support in the H. of Reps.
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/110/gen.rolls-geo/h2007-993.png
At first glance, this really looks like a bad idea. I just sent off a quick note to my Senator in hopes he can head it off at the pass...
Submariner
10-27-07, 17:21
Was it before this (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21490838/)? :rolleyes: Vain and aspiting men, indeed.
FEMA has arrived and has the situation well in hand.
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:bkdi47hQA3y2iM:http://dunamai.com/Humor/BagdadBob/images/bagdad_bob_large.gif
HolyRoller
10-27-07, 18:06
The Declaration of Independence founded the nation. See reference to twelfth year of Independence. Think charter (Declaration) of corporation and by-laws (first Articles of Confederation, then Constitution).
To separate the two is imprudent, HolyRoller. That's why the Supreme Court ducks some issues calling them "political questions." They get settled by force of arms. Hence the Second Amendment. You do support the right of the people to keep and bear arms, right, HolyRoller?
To my last breath, last drop of blood, last cartridge, last blade, and last unbroken glue-on fingernail.:D In our 900-square-mile county, we guarantee that if a deputy isn't there in 30 minutes from when you call 911, your next call is free--so you better look out for your own defense because by the time we get to your home invasion call, about all the "police" work we can do is police up the brass. A well-armed populace is by far the best deterrent to tyranny. With about 200 million each guns and cars on the loose, dictatorship will be hard to keep up.
You betcha, no Declaration of Independence, no USA (and no cool movies with Nick Cage and Sean Bean trying to find the Declaration). But, no Constitution, no separated-powers republic with written-down rights of the people. The Declaration is not a plan of government or a bill of specific guaranteed rights. It's mostly a list of the very bad stuff that George II actually did to the Americans, and then a statement that now we are going to be our own country and do all the stuff that sovereigns usually do. It doesn't say what form of government the United States of America is going to have. It doesn't say all kings are bad, just George II. For all you can read in the Declaration, we could have appointed George Washington emperor, so long as he wasn't too bad an emperor. And, the Declaration of Independence, calling for war and revolution against Great Britain, was the product of duly elected GOVERNMENT officials representing the American people, not individuals complaining about problems that didn't exist.
You betcha, the Soopreme Court has held waaaaaay too many of our obvious rights to be only protected by the political process instead of the Constitution. They have also given waaaaaaaaay too much power to the federal government through the Commerce Clause, example, if a gun has ever MOVED in interstate commerce, then it's subject for the next thousand years to the federal power to regulate commerce. Let's see if they'll take the DC gun ban case and hold RKBA to override the commerce power--and they just might do it.
Whoever does not like the Constitution the way it is or the way the Supremes read it, then go get the Constitution amended and/or work for the election of a president and Senate that will appoint and confirm more good justices like Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Scalia. Or hey, run for office yourself.
All these new laws and iegislation being proposed by people like Ted kennedy,Diane Finestine and Chuck Shumer really make me scared. When our own elected officals try to pass laws that clearly violate the constitution we all should be worried, very worried.
Submariner
10-28-07, 03:26
Whoever does not like the Constitution the way it is or the way the Supremes read it, then go get the Constitution amended and/or work for the election of a president and Senate that will appoint and confirm more good justices like Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Scalia. Or hey, run for office yourself.
Please provide the article and section of the Constitution that provides for judicial review.
No good can come from this...
Good can come from this, most animals will not strike save feeling threatened.
This law used against patriotic citizens will trigger many to feel threatened.
Whoever does not like the Constitution the way it is or the way the Supremes read it, then go get the Constitution amended and/or work for the election of a president and Senate that will appoint and confirm more good justices like Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Scalia. Or hey, run for office yourself.
People should not have to lobby or campaign for rights. The constitution is a contract between the federation and the people to protect the people's pre-existing rights given by Nature. The rights of those with no interest in voting or politics altogether should not be threatened because large lobbying entities shed millions to change the law. Nor should they be threatened by a partisan judge.
While the Federalist Papers are not the law, they provide clear interpretation of what the Framers meant and leave not much room for assumption.
Interesting thread, Paul. I've been involved in a couple of similar discussions over on LF, also.
Some of my observations:
1. We all talk a great game about defending the Constitution with force of arms, but I'd say think again. Witness how we've handled the insurgency in Iraq. You'd be just another insurgent. I particularly appreciate all those shots of JDAMS, 30mm, 25mm, and other ordnance taking out targets with pinpoint precision. Feel like being a target of opportunity? Your 5.56 is no match for a 120mm sabot.
2. It's not just your life that will be on the line. It will also be that of your family. Are you ready to sacrifice your wife, your children, or your grand children for the cause? Better than half this pathetic nation would be willing to subjugate themselves as long as they still get their dose of American Idol and Survivor. For me personally, I'll sacrifice my family for one entity and one entity only, my God. I did my bit for this nation. They've pretty much told me they'd rather be socialist and secular humanist. So be it.
3. The majority (pretty much all) of the mil and LE community will follow orders. It's what they're trained to do. I can assure you the mil types don't have the luxury of questioning the "Constitutionality" of each and every order they're given. If Congress enacts it, the President signs it, and the Supreme Court lets it go, then its law. And we obey the law or become criminals. It doesn't mean anything that you believe it's unconstitutional. (Reference #1 above: We've already given up the "right" to bear military arms. It's a pretty straight shot to give up the rest.)
Time for a reality check, me thinks. As a wisened old warrior has said, "The sky is falling." Time to take cover.
Karl
2. It's not just your life that will be on the line. It will also be that of your family. Are you ready to sacrifice your wife, your children, or your grand children for the cause? Better than half this pathetic nation would be willing to subjugate themselves as long as they still get their dose of American Idol and Survivor. For me personally, I'll sacrifice my family for one entity and one entity only, my God. I did my bit for this nation. They've pretty much told me they'd rather be socialist and secular humanist. So be it.
Am I to understand that we will go lay down our lives for ANOTHER COUNTRYS FREEDOM, but NOT our OWN FREEDOM, because of family?
Weren't there a LOT of GREEDOM fighters in this country, that gave up life, family, wealth, and more, so we could enjoy freedom?
I'm DAMN glad they did, for me and you.
To bad a lot of "AMERICANS" would rather roll over and give up without a fight.
Just another "INTERNET" opinion. Won't be able to wright this, once this FREEDOM is taken away also.
Am I to understand that we will go lay down our lives for ANOTHER COUNTRYS FREEDOM, but NOT our OWN FREEDOM, because of family?
When we're outside the wire in Iraq or A'stan, our family is not the one's receiving fire.
I will put my family's lives at risk to worship our God, but not to defend a piece of paper that few in this nation care about anymore. You will be stomped on just as hard and just as surely as the folks at Waco. And you will be considered just as dangerous and just as lunatic. Nope, ain't worth it in my book.
It would be interesting if Hillary became Commander and Cheif. How many in our military and police would stand behind her with there full support? Maybe the best thing for this country would be for her to get in the office.:eek: Well, then again, God forbid.
It would be interesting if Hillary became Commander and Cheif. How many in our military and police would stand behind her with there full support?
Why wouldn't they? I spent six years under her husband. I don't blame Bill, I blame the nation that voted him into office.
Joseywales
10-30-07, 22:05
Stalin and Teddy Kennedy have so much in common. Oceania is almost here. We just need Hillary or Obama to take office.:eek:
Joseywales
10-30-07, 22:08
When we're outside the wire in Iraq or A'stan, our family is not the one's receiving fire.
I will put my family's lives at risk to worship our God, but not to defend a piece of paper that few in this nation care about anymore. You will be stomped on just as hard and just as surely as the folks at Waco. And you will be considered just as dangerous and just as lunatic. Nope, ain't worth it in my book.
Interesting. By not defending the Constitution because others don't care, aren't you really the one that doesn't care?
Your logic is circular jedi master;)
You will be stomped on just as hard and just as surely as the folks at Waco.
Always a poor idea to use Waco to make an argument. They (the adults) were disturbed, child molesting garbage that needed to be eradicated. Just because they had guns doesn't mean they were worthy of owning them, nor were they worthy of being free.
When we're outside the wire in Iraq or A'stan, our family is not the one's receiving fire.
When your outside the wire, who's family is receiving fire?
I will put my family's lives at risk to worship our God, but not to defend a piece of paper that few in this nation care about anymore. You will be stomped on just as hard and just as surely as the folks at Waco. And you will be considered just as dangerous and just as lunatic. Nope, ain't worth it in my book.
In my BOOK, kind of scary, when I think about that. Verry few cared about that "PEICE OF PAPER" before it became one, but thank YOUR GOD, someone did, so we could have it for as long as WE desire to keep it alive. When we don't give a damn, we have LOST!
Submariner
10-31-07, 07:21
Here's a dangerous thought...
Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech. Benjamin Franklin
Folks, there is no need to worry about government oppression or the government doing anything at all to any of us.
The government will collapse on it's own, under the sheer weight of it's bureaucracy, it's debt, and it's corruption. All you have to do as a citizen is sit back and watch.
We're only a couple of years away from the whole country going bankrupt. We're teetering on the brink and it has nothing to do with Republicans, Democrats, guns, gay marriage, or whether they say "Merry Christmas" at WalMart. It's all about money - and unfortunately we're spending far too much to ever hope to repay the federal debt, which will continue to grow to epic proportions. Eventually, we'll either default on the debt, or have to raise taxes to such high levels where even the liberals will be rioting in the streets.
Sorry if this is a bit of a thread drift ... :)
Why wouldn't they? I spent six years under her husband. I don't blame Bill, I blame the nation that voted him into office.
You're right.
Remember New Orleans - the police absolutely unlawfully confiscated firearms from otherwise law abiding citizens and dragged them out of their homes by force. They did what they were ordered to do.
Submariner
10-31-07, 08:12
It's all about money - and unfortunately we're spending far too much to ever hope to repay the federal debt, which will continue to grow to epic proportions. Eventually, we'll either default on the debt, or have to raise taxes to such high levels where even the liberals will be rioting in the streets.
Sorry if this is a bit of a thread drift ... :)
Or inflate away the value of the dollar to nothing (to make room for the amero.) Not worth a Continental will be understandable to all.
No drift at all. Such speech must be suppressed. Hence the Bill.
Stalin and Teddy Kennedy have so much in common. Oceania is almost here. We just need Hillary or Obama to take office.:eek:
Or Guiliani.....
Business_Casual
10-31-07, 10:54
Always a poor idea to use Waco to make an argument. They (the adults) were disturbed, child molesting garbage that needed to be eradicated. Just because they had guns doesn't mean they were worthy of owning them, nor were they worthy of being free.
I'm curious about this, because I frankly do not know what to believe. I understand there would be an argument to inspect the premises if child molestation was occuring, but I didn't know that was a federal crime under the jurisdiction of the BATFE. I also have read a lot of, admittedly biased, libertarian authors who claim that the child molestation was a ruse or an unfounded accusation. So if we take it as read that child molestation was thought to be occuring, doesn't he still get the benefit of a trial? Innocent until proven guilty, remember? Eradicating citzens because they believe certain things or say - or even do - certain things is bit outside what we do as a people. Sure, once it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then fine, prison, electric chair, shark feeding, whatever. :) Just be sure that you can precisely say who is "worthy" of their inalienable rights before you do any of that, please.
I'm just asking how A) child molestation was known and was a prosecutor aware and trying to make a case B) is due process suspended because the suspected crime is henious C) is it possible that a hot button phrase like "child molestor" could be used after the fact to draw attention away from the mistakes made - on both sides D) didn't the trial acquit a bunch of the Branch Davidians later on? E) Weren't all the weapons found to be regular semi-autos?
Let me tie this back into the topic at hand - if the people can't say what they think about what happened because it is seditious, then should we just accept what the Government tells us happened? Should we just accept their explanations for the strange sequence of events? Since the average Joe watching the news can't tell an Air Soft replica from an unobtainable full-auto G36, is it possible that we should be skeptical of what the .gov wants us to believe?
M_P
Always a poor idea to use Waco to make an argument. They (the adults) were disturbed, child molesting garbage that needed to be eradicated. Just because they had guns doesn't mean they were worthy of owning them, nor were they worthy of being free.
By your own statement, "Just because you have a pen and a computor, doesn't mean you are worthy of owning them"? "Nor are you worthy of being free"?
Are you better than others?
Did other leaders throughout history think they were? Enough to condem and sentence to DEATH?
Interesting. By not defending the Constitution because others don't care, aren't you really the one that doesn't care?
Your logic is circular jedi master
Really?! Who gets to decide whether I'm defending the Constitution or I'm just another tin-foil hat lunatic with a gun who's breaking the law?
I hope you all get the point here. Someone tell me at what point you will be willing to break the law and meet any LE/mil personnel, that come to enforce it, with arms? My contention is that point should have been reached some time ago, if it was ever going to be reached. It's an example of the boiled frog syndrome. You will die alone and looking like a crazed madman.
When we don't give a damn, we have LOST!
Check out my statements above, Gramps. And tell me when you intend to start breaking the law and defending the Constitution (as you see it). What piece of unconstitutional (by your definition) piece of legislation will turn you into a patriot criminal?
I hope ya'll do begin to understand why I believe nothing will happen. If Congress makes the law, the POTUS enacts the law, and the Supreme Court lets it go, then it's the bloody law of the land. And if you are willing to take up arms against those who would enforce that law, then you'll get classified a nut job criminal just like those folks at Waco. I'm not willing to give up my life for a group of people who couldn't care less and believe I'm nothing but a lunatic.
Believe me when I say my hope is NOT in the Constitution of the U.S.
Always a poor idea to use Waco to make an argument. They (the adults) were disturbed, child molesting garbage that needed to be eradicated. Just because they had guns doesn't mean they were worthy of owning them, nor were they worthy of being free.
And just what do think is going to be said about you after the FBI and crew have riddled your body with 5.56?
Really?! Who gets to decide whether I'm defending the Constitution or I'm just another tin-foil hat lunatic with a gun who's breaking the law?
I hope you all get the point here. Someone tell me at what point you will be willing to break the law and meet any LE/mil personnel, that come to enforce it, with arms? My contention is that point should have been reached some time ago, if it was ever going to be reached. It's an example of the boiled frog syndrome. You will die alone and looking like a crazed madman.
Check out my statements above, Gramps. And tell me when you intend to start breaking the law and defending the Constitution (as you see it). What piece of unconstitutional (by your definition) piece of legislation will turn you into a patriot criminal?
I hope ya'll do begin to understand why I believe nothing will happen. If Congress makes the law, the POTUS enacts the law, and the Supreme Court lets it go, then it's the bloody law of the land. And if you are willing to take up arms against those who would enforce that law, then you'll get classified a nut job criminal just like those folks at Waco. I'm not willing to give up my life for a group of people who couldn't care less and believe I'm nothing but a lunatic.
Believe me when I say my hope is NOT in the Constitution of the U.S.
You are right on in your thinking. We (US) citizens have already shown that we will roll over and take it up the @$$ for a multitude of different things. The illegal immigrants, high taxes, and anything else that gets cramed down our throats. Why shouldn't an assault weapons ban or any weapons ban be placed on the US. If it does the people will do absolutely nothing about it, same as they don't do anything about paying outragous taxes to support the education of illegals in the country or the hords of them that show up at our hospitals wanting medical care.
Go to a hospital emergency room in the middle of the night on a full moon in a half way heavily populated area where there are a lot of illegals, and guess who is paying to have their aliments treated. We pay for that and don't do anything about it.
Why will guns be different?
If it ever does come down to it, all these jokers you see on the net talking about how they will never let it happen, "From my cold, dead, fingers.....Bla,Bla,BLa", it has already happened. Our leaders have seen that we are not a vigilant population and that we don't for the most part keep track of what legislation is passed and they know if they want to bad enough, they can get anything done they want. America for the most part is not what it was 50 years ago and probably will never be that again. It really makes me sad to see how everyday it is always something else, some other right that we are faced with loosing.
I hate to be pesimestic about the whole thing, but one can't help but be in recent years.
OK, I GET IT. WHEN SOME ONE WITH THE POWER SAY'S, BEND OVER IT'S THE LAW, JUST DO IT AND BE GLAD I COULD BE OF SERVICE TO THEM. DON'T STAND UP FOR WHAT I BELEIVE IN, BECAUSE THAT WOULD LABLE ME A LUNATIC.
I BELEIVE IN GOD, AND THAT HE GAVE US ALL THE POWER OF CHOICE, BUT I GET THE IMRESSION THERE ARE THOSE WHO THINK OTHERS OUTSIDE THEIR REALM SHOULD NOT HAVE THE POWER OF CHOICE. THEY MIGHT CHOSE TO BE A LUNITIC AND CHOOSE TO DEFEND THEIR PROPERTY/FAMILY.
WOULD I BE A LUNATIC IF I WAS NOT A LE OR MILTARY, AND OWNED, SINGLE SHOT GUNS, BOLT ACTIONS, LEVER ACTIONS, AND SEMI-AUTOS? ALL LEAGALY? BY THE "LAW"?
IS IT OUR WRIGHT TO DEFEND OURSELVES AND COUNTRY? OR IS IT OUR DUTY TO DEFEND OURSELVES AND COUNTRY?
WE CANNOT SURVIVE WITHOUT SOME LAW AND ORDER, BUT I THINK THE SCALES COULD BE BEGINNING TO GET OUT OF BALANCE.
OK, I GET IT. WHEN SOME ONE WITH THE POWER SAY'S, BEND OVER IT'S THE LAW, JUST DO IT AND BE GLAD I COULD BE OF SERVICE TO THEM. DON'T STAND UP FOR WHAT I BELEIVE IN, BECAUSE THAT WOULD LABLE ME A LUNATIC.
OK, maybe I can put it in better context.
I contend the income tax is unconstitutional. I will refuse to pay my income tax. When the IRS and other LE agencies come to get me, I will meet them with force of arms.
So, to you, am I a nut job criminal or a patriot? If you believe I am a patriot, will you stand with me?
(And you never did answer my question about what unconstitutional condition it will take for you to meet LE officials with force of arms.)
Business_Casual
10-31-07, 16:49
(And you never did answer my question about what unconstitutional condition it will take for you to meet LE officials with force of arms.)
Er, answering that would be sedition...
M_P
Submariner
10-31-07, 17:03
Er, answering that would be sedition...
M_P
And sedition is prohibited by the CoC.;)
Into whose evidence locker was the front door to the brand Davidian complex transferred. And the small arms allegedly converted to full-auto probable cause for whixh was the asis of the warrant?
Er, answering that would be sedition...
As would actually carrying out the answer. Which makes my point. Ain't nobody gonna do nothin' but bitch (and quietly if the the law that started this thread passes).
The only reasonable recourse is to attempt to insure such laws are not passed. If they are, then one has to hope the SCOTUS will declare it unconstitutional (which, as Paul pointed out, can only be done if someone has the money and time to contest the law).
This ain't your Founding Father's nation anymore. We saw to that a long time ago.
KintlaLake
10-31-07, 17:18
Er, answering that would be sedition...
I think that ship just sailed...:rolleyes:
...that piece of shit Ted Kennedy...Ted Kennedy, Diane Feinstein and Chuck Schumer...Teddy...Hillary...Teddy Kennedy...Hillary...Obama...
For cryin' out loud, the House vote was 404 to 6...
I'm curious about this, because I frankly do not know what to believe. I understand there would be an argument to inspect the premises if child molestation was occuring, but I didn't know that was a federal crime under the jurisdiction of the BATFE. I also have read a lot of, admittedly biased, libertarian authors who claim that the child molestation was a ruse or an unfounded accusation. So if we take it as read that child molestation was thought to be occuring, doesn't he still get the benefit of a trial? Innocent until proven guilty, remember? Eradicating citzens because they believe certain things or say - or even do - certain things is bit outside what we do as a people. Sure, once it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then fine, prison, electric chair, shark feeding, whatever. :) Just be sure that you can precisely say who is "worthy" of their inalienable rights before you do any of that, please.
I'm just asking how A) child molestation was known and was a prosecutor aware and trying to make a case B) is due process suspended because the suspected crime is henious C) is it possible that a hot button phrase like "child molestor" could be used after the fact to draw attention away from the mistakes made - on both sides D) didn't the trial acquit a bunch of the Branch Davidians later on? E) Weren't all the weapons found to be regular semi-autos?
Let me tie this back into the topic at hand - if the people can't say what they think about what happened because it is seditious, then should we just accept what the Government tells us happened? Should we just accept their explanations for the strange sequence of events? Since the average Joe watching the news can't tell an Air Soft replica from an unobtainable full-auto G36, is it possible that we should be skeptical of what the .gov wants us to believe?
M_P
It was a known fact in the town of Waco for many years that these people were bizarre individuals up to no good. Forget what the FBI or any other government agency said. I know somebody well who lived there for 9 years who told me that they made the entire town uncomfortable. And don't be an ass and make me specifically define what "up to no good" is. Draw a ****ing line at some point.
As a responsible "assault weapon" owner, I don't want or need sick people like them representing me in the news or anywhere else.
By your own statement, "Just because you have a pen and a computor, doesn't mean you are worthy of owning them"? "Nor are you worthy of being free"?
Are you better than others?
Absolutely ridiculous. This gives the term "reaching" new meaning.
Let's now apply your logic to the typical crime generating trash walking around Philadelphia or other urban areas. Maybe somehow they are worthy too...
:rolleyes:
Don Robison
10-31-07, 22:42
It was a known fact in the town of Waco for many years that these people were bizarre individuals up to no good. Forget what the FBI or any other government agency said. I know somebody well who lived there for 9 years who told me that they made the entire town uncomfortable. And don't be an ass and make me specifically define what "up to no good" is. Draw a ****ing line at some point.
As a responsible "assault weapon" owner, I don't want or need sick people like them representing me in the news or anywhere else.
+1
My uncle has lived in Waco since the late 50's and his reaction was "What the hell took them so long?"
Business_Casual
10-31-07, 22:44
It was a known fact in the town of Waco for many years that these people were bizarre individuals up to no good. I know somebody well who lived there for 9 years who told me that they made the entire town uncomfortable.
Just like Sarah Good and Sarah Osbourne in New England then.
M_P
Just like Sarah Good and Sarah Osbourne in New England then.
M_P
More reaching.
As a responsible "assault weapon" owner,
Oh really?! Says who? You?! Son, if you ever decide that you won't obey a law that's been legally enacted (even thought you feel it's unconstitutional), you just became just as big of a dangerous nutjob as anyone in the Davidian compound. And that's the reality. And you'll deserve to have your house burned to the ground and you and yours killed, just like the low-life's on that compound.
So, still feeling self-righteous?
Believe me, it would be fairly straight forward for the federal government to turn the members of this board into defacto criminals (i.e. no grandfather clause next time). Ya'll can go ahead and continue to believe you are somehow above the law, because you don't agree with it. But you'll be just as dead as the Davidians, at the end of the day, if you decide not to obey it. (And looking just as pathetic and mentally deranged as the Davidians.)
crowkiller
11-01-07, 09:46
New United North American dollar bill should read-Liberty and Freedom is nothing more than an idea from a time past this is 2007. One North America under Government and by Government for the Government.
I am sick and down right tired of the freakin government.
Submariner
11-01-07, 10:28
"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?
After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you'd be cracking the skull of a cutthroat. Or what about the Black Maria sitting out there on the street with one lonely chauffeur; what if it had been driven off or its tires spiked? The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!"
There is nothing new under the sun...
This has more than run it's course.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.