At the same time, Aas Jefferson, Lincoln, Justice William O. Douglas, Associate Justice Robert Jackson, Justice Arthur Goldberg and Judge Richard Posner (of neocon fame) have all noted that the Constitution is not a suicide pact. All have noticed that one can have reasonable restrictions on the Constitution.
As for the resistance to tyranny argument. That's been shown to be invalid. That argument advocates private nukes, artillery pieces, tanks etc. Which plainly is a suicide pact for the nation. Look at places where that is the case already, such as Somalia, Sudan, etc. Moreover using the resistance to tyranny argument is only really applicable when you fully take into consideration the first clause - the well regulated militia clause. Then the resistance to tyranny argument is something other than nonsense. Tim you need to start reading more on the philosophy of government and society - look up the idea behaind the social contract. Or the idea of freedom within the law. You're just starting a world of hurt for yourself if you go through with this. Its a very quixotic protest. On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:16 AM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Understand this. We live in a constitutional republic, not a democracy. > Even if 99% of our population wants to violate the rights of the 1% they > CANNOT legally do so. This is the United States, not Canada or England or > Australia. I don't care if the evidence showed that gun control worked, > according to our philosophy it wouldn't matter. > > Going the route of executive order is the act of a despot and a tyrant. > Make no mistake, executive orders are decrees that carry the strength of > law, totally outside of the normal checks and balances of our government. > This is not accetable. > > On Feb. 8th there will be a series of nationwide pro-gun rallies > nationwide. These will be armed demonstrations, conducted in a legal and > safe manner to demonstrae to this administration that we the people will no > longer accept any type of unconstitutional laws oe limits on the free > expression and execution of our natural inalienable rights. > > In continuing my on going fight against the immoral and unconstitutional > restrictions laced against me by the federal government I will be attending > and will be carrying both a side arm and a long gun. I will be doing so > openly and in violation of both federal and state laws. I have already > notified both local and federal law enforcement of my intentions. It is my > desire and expectation that I will be arrested during this protest. > > The arrest will provide me with standing to challenge existing laws in > local and federal court. Without proving you have been impacted by a law, > you may not challange it. > > I don't mind sitting in a cell in order to defend my rights and the rights > of over 100,000 veterans. Civil disobiedience has a long and storied > history in our nation, being used in every major political change in our > nation since and including the revoluton itself. I feel as though I am the > ideal candidate for such an action. I am a decorated combat veteran, a > person who spent years in both uniformed and civilian government service. > I am not a felon, have never been accused of domestic abuse, and I have > never been forcibly committed against my will. I have medical opinions > showing that I am neither homicidal nor suicidal. I have had no due > process or other protections afforded to me, and I have been told that a VA > appeal can take as long as 4 years, certainly a "speedy trial" violation. > My child support is handled automatically and will contine even if I'm > locked up. > > I do not want to see violence in my country. I will submit peacefully to > arrest or detainment. I will not however stop my fight for our natural > rights no matter the results. > > I know most of you will not understand this decision. We are for the most > part comfortable, and still mainly free, even though with things like the > NDAA and the NDRP the framework for total control is already in place. > This is not acceptable. Ask yourself, who started the revoltuionary war? > Was it the colonists insistance that their rights be respected, or was it > insane taxation, tariffs, lack of due process and finally gun control that > kicked off the war? Enough is enough and if we wish to prtect the republic > and roll back the thousands of unconstitutional and therefore illegal laws > and regulations on the books we must act now. > > I am a free man. Make whatever laws you wish, and I will still be free in > that my actions and my thoughts are my own, and nothing anyone ever does > will change this short of my death, and I refuse to provide anyone with a > reason to legally take my life. > On Jan 10, 2013 9:17 AM, "Sam" <sammyc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> That worked so well for drugs too. >> If you take guns away from law abiding citizens then only the >> criminals will have them. >> >> . >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:10 AM, GMoney <gm0n3...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Gun control works if it's area wide.....country wide......it hasn't >> worked >> > in America because it's isolated. I mean, it's like diving to the middle >> of >> > the Pacific, and declaring it a "water-free zone"...then wondering why >> > everything there is still wet. >> > >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:359858 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
