They were not put in place as SERVANTS to tell us what our rights are. They were put there to catch and lock up bad guys. If they become the bad guys, then they have no reasonable expectation of privacy (like that?), or reasonable expectation or any measure of respect, honor or freedom. Lock them up with Bubba, throw away the key, and refuse to tell anyone that they were once worth a shit.
No, but since corruption is their modus operendi, legitimacy never occurrs to them. There is only one thing they care about, and that is Power. Nothing else matters.
The question was raised "Can corrupt government legitimately decide who it allows to keep and bear arms?"
I do not believe a corrupt government - and most certainly not one so corrupt as our own - can do ANYTHING legitimately. When a government has strayed this far off the reservation, then conditions obtain that make that Cal. Congressman's statement absolutely accurate, In purely practical, pragmatic terns the government can do pretty much anything it damned well pleases. And it will continue to do until/unless it is stopped by force.
I no longer believe that the Republic can be returned to any semblance of its proper function. It can only be demolished and rebuilt from the ground up. The current constitution can be used as a basis for the 2nd American Republic ONLY if it is modified such that it begins - AND ENDS - with ABSOLUTELY EXPLICIT AND UNEQUIVOCAL language clearly stating that the States are supreme and the central government has no powers or authority not explicitly to it.
The new constitution should also include in the definition of treason failure to uphold their oath to that constitution by any public officeholder, elected or appointed. Such oath breaking to be defined as anything a jury considers it to be. The penalty for conviction of that meaning of "treason" shall be specified in the new constitution as being death by firing squad. The only form of life lower than an oath breaker is a soldier who breaks faith with his comrades in arms and a barracks thief.
I know how to ensure the "compliance" of our political "servants".... When they stray off the constitutional path, we put their Name AND address out on the web and we let them know that we are watching them...
8 comments:
"They have to make sure you can be trusted."
They were not put in place as SERVANTS to tell us what our rights are. They were put there to catch and lock up bad guys. If they become the bad guys, then they have no reasonable expectation of privacy (like that?), or reasonable expectation or any measure of respect, honor or freedom. Lock them up with Bubba, throw away the key, and refuse to tell anyone that they were once worth a shit.
I'd say, "No." But how do you make the charge of corruption stick?
With or without the expectation of surviving the process...
M
They will certainly try...not saying they will succeed
My Right to Bear Arms or ANY of My Other Right Does Not come from Any Government Legitimate or Corrupt no difference.
My Rights are exactly that
"MY RIGHTS" because "I" say so. No government has ANY SAY in the matter.
Dennis
III
Texas
No, but since corruption is their modus operendi, legitimacy never occurrs to them. There is only one thing they care about, and that is Power. Nothing else matters.
The question was raised "Can corrupt government legitimately decide who it allows to keep and bear arms?"
I do not believe a corrupt government - and most certainly not one so corrupt as our own - can do ANYTHING legitimately. When a government has strayed this far off the reservation, then conditions obtain that make that Cal. Congressman's statement absolutely accurate, In purely practical, pragmatic terns the government can do pretty much anything it damned well pleases. And it will continue to do until/unless it is stopped by force.
I no longer believe that the Republic can be returned to any semblance of its proper function. It can only be demolished and rebuilt from the ground up. The current constitution can be used as a basis for the 2nd American Republic ONLY if it is modified such that it begins - AND ENDS - with ABSOLUTELY EXPLICIT AND UNEQUIVOCAL language clearly stating that the States are supreme and the central government has no powers or authority not explicitly to it.
The new constitution should also include in the definition of treason failure to uphold their oath to that constitution by any public officeholder, elected or appointed. Such oath breaking to be defined as anything a jury considers it to be. The penalty for conviction of that meaning of "treason" shall be specified in the new constitution as being death by firing squad. The only form of life lower than an oath breaker is a soldier who breaks faith with his comrades in arms and a barracks thief.
Bad Cyborg X
I know how to ensure the "compliance" of our political "servants".... When they stray off the constitutional path, we put their Name AND address out on the web and we let them know that we are watching them...
For David III:
Do you REALLY think the pigs are going to let you do that? As long as they're alive?
Post a Comment