Posted on 01/06/2013 10:19:08 AM PST by marktwain
B Husseins' actions have been divisive from the get-go. They have set racial relations back decades, have demonized Christians, the law-abiding, those who strongly believe in the US Constitution, the military, and gun owners, not to mention arming criminals.
Nothing he has done (with the aid of his media minions) has been to unify the country, instead he seeks to divide it along every possible line.
What was it the Al-Qaida people were saying after 9/11? They were going to split America in half.
Obama has done it.
The problem is that they are confusing the public, too, with statements about "spraying bullets". I cleared up that misconception for a couple of people just yesterday by calmly explaining the difference, and the restrictions on machine guns after 1934 and 1986.
Essentially, what is called an "AK-47" here usually is a semiautomatic version that fires one shot per trigger pull. If you can find the 'real thing' for sale legally (a select fire transferable weapon), you have to pass an extensive background check, pay a transfer fee and then buy the rifle, generally thousands of dollars if you can find one.
The same rifle, I point out, is allowed to every Iraqi household and only costs about 300 dollars in the rest of the world. That part raised eyebrows...
It was "thought" of HERE as far back as 1775. We are slipping back into the same situation as then...the government refuses to leave our liberty and property alone.
They haven't started overtly taking our lives....(yet)....but I would speculate that this would follow as the tax burden gets heavier...tax resistance becomes stronger and they start sending goon squads out to "confiscate" arms from law abiding citizens.
These are again "TIMES THAT TRY MEN'S SOULS".
The solution that Walter E. Williams and you suggested is a peaceful way to resolve a tense situation...but alas, the present pols, pundants and welfare class do not seem to be willing to allow it.
Appreciate your reply, but this part:
“The only reason for the Right ...”
... is not correct, and here is why:
Various wordings of the Second Amendment were tried during its development. The end result *purposefully* leaves out any enumeration of reasons why an individual has the right to keep and bear Arms. Any reason *why* an individual may or may not keep and bear Arms, was left to the states and the people thereof, to settle among themselves.
The only enumeration in the Second Amendment focuses on what to do about a group of men under Arms - what is to happen when individuals who bear military grade Arms are in a group, and they *are* capable of exercising martial power. What *then,* was to become of that power?
The answer was, that both the states and the federal government would rely upon *the group* being formally mustered, well-regulated, well trained to Arms, well discplined, and answerable to civilian authority.
Both the states and the federal government sought unity of function and preparedness of the militia of each state. The state militiae should be “well trained to Arms” and be capable of, and mindful of, lawfully exercising martial power and respecting lawful civilian authority.
In the old days up to around WW-I times and for a while thereafter, there was a tradition of local militia drilling on the common, the town green, or the county fairgrounds. It gave people an opportunity to remain somewhat familiar with military duty; it helped to keep them from becoming too rusty. It demonstrated the proper practices and discipline *for all to see.*
It is a shame that most communities and counties and states got out of that practice.
All the uses of weapons, firearm or not, for non-military purposes, were left to be decided by the states and their people.
Again, there would be no condition within the Second Amendment, by which you do, or do not, have the right to keep and bear Arms; because, the Founding Fathers correctly anticipated that any such enumerated condition might be used as grounds for an individual to either be forced to bear Arms or be stripped of their Arms.
You're right - and thanks for your kindness...
:)
The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism.
Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made.
Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.
Well, we're here.
The State Militias (Armies) are gone, for all practical purposes, either under Federal Command, or deployed abroad. Most National Guard units are designated as the "State Militia", but can be called up by the Federal Government. The State Governments increasingly stripped of power and relevance by the apparent inability to resist the redistribution of tax money to the states with strings attached, yielding progressively more power to the Federal Government. Regulations and law have become a rubber stamp of the Federal version, imposed by popular demand for "Government money", in schemes which undermine the spirit, if not the letter of the Constitution.
We (not us, specifically, but the country) has elected that succession, with rare exception, and the progress made by those who daily craft legislation to destroy our Liberty in even the most minute things has continued unabated: Only the sunset clause in the '94 AWB removed that legislation, not a vote of the Legislature--and those pushing that and more now seek to make that permanent. Your light bulbs and toilets are at the mercy of the Congress, and having exerted themselves thus in minutiae with no meaningful resistance, they now want our arms.
The tyranny advances daily, and with it comes encumbrances on the fruits of those who labor.
Correct the numbers for the current population, however, and we are left with the bare fact that the People, in possession of their arms, constitute the last line of defense of Liberty.
All other uses for arms pale in comparison to this reason for their possession by the People.
Furthermore, in consideration of this reason alone, there should be no infringements on the Right, otherwise the People would be placed at a severe disadvantage.
Those in this succession of usurpers know full well that the totalitarian grip on America cannot be consolidated without the removal of the ability to practice the Right, and have chipped away at it to the point they think they can reduce it to meaninglessness with a single blow.
It is, and remains, only the potential of the force of arms in private hands which deters this.
IF we fail to secure the Right, by whatever means necessary, the last days of this Republic will be nasty, brutish, and short.
Well said; very good argument; and you are correct, it tears up my heart to have to say, as I am sure you are also not at all happy about the situation.
I believe the time has come, that for each county throughout each of the states, that county Tea Party should convene and choose 2 representatives to attend a Tea Party convention of their state, which will in turn debate and then consider and elect 2 representatives of their state, to attend a unique Tea Party national convention for the purpose of establishing a Second Continental Congress.
Setting the time and place for a first setting of the Second Continental Congress, then the unique national convention shall adjourn, and the representatives return to their states, where the Tea Party conventions of each state, will then take into consideration, who shall be their 2 representatives in the Second Continental Congress.
I believe, it is time to follow in the steps of our Founding Fathers, and create a new ship of state, to which our allegiance and love of our worthy American heritage and many foundations, shall transfer.
I believe, that *everybody* needs to see this preparation and action.
If the existing federal government fails us and takes one more step toward tyranny on which it has proven to be hell-bent, then we know, as Benjamin Franklin et al knew, it is time.
We must have a new democratic-republic to be where people can again be free from government tyranny, and we must, thru starting with a Second Continental Congress, make a good government, which will very likely be framed as the first but with a few refinements regarding how we may better limit government and that includes the courts.
Look, for instance at how people rallied around the Patriot Act, and look at what we got.
Fundamentally, the Federal Constitution we have, along with the Bill of Rights, a clear definition of "Natural Born Citizenship", further and more specific constraints on the Powers of the Federal Government--especially when it comes to interstate commerce, and a clear definition of Life and the Right thereto would be a good start.
Those who wrote the framing documents were more than just knowledgeable about the classics, the actions of those in history; they were knowledgeable about human nature as well, including the inevitable despotism which has wormed its way through the minute chinks in our statutory armor.
No.
But that isn't the question that needs to be addressed.
The question is: Do they? They can back down and avoid all that bloodshed. Or they can push for it and they'll get it.
What do you think those mentored by terrorist bombers who said they'd have to reeducate Americans and eliminate the 25 million or so who can't be reeducated will do?
Do you really think they are going to let us peacefully die of old age in a rocking chair somewhere?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.