Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Ashotep

Get rid of the Constitution

276 posts in this topic

Its as easy as opening a phone book...

http://constitution.org/mil/mil_us.htm

But the 2nd Amendment says no such thing as...

It actually says

Hats lets itleast quote it correctly.

Right. It means what I said. The people are to be the militia when one is formed. And don't tell me that's what the National Guard is for now. They have been sucked into the system. I'm not saying our military would side with true and exposed tyranny but it is bestowed upon US citizens not to take that chance. Therefore we must be ready to be the driving force and it will be our responsibility to stock up our own supplies from food to tents to guns. Seriously, in such a scenario where else should we expect help and supplies to come from besides eachother?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you are a coward because you have admited that no matter what unconstitutional violations your government commits you wont express any level of resistance. No one asked you to shoot anyone.

Preacher, I have said no such thing. I even said the poster could protest his idea of unconstitutional violations all he wanted. And use the ballot box. Your support of the 2nd amendment as a way to overthrow the government is where I would not go.

Edited by ninjadude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think ninjadude is capable of providing an example of government doing anything that's unconstitutional.

The problem is that until the issue is decided, it's nothing more than your opinion. Sure I think lots of stuff is unconstitutional. FISA, Guantanamo, the Iraq war, GWB's 2000 election, prayer and religion in schools, DOMA, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kneel before a corrupt government. defending the constitution

the problem is that you think you're right. Democracy or in our case, representative government means that one person doesn't decide what is constitutional or corrupt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it will be our responsibility to stock up our own supplies from food to tents to guns.

do you seriously not see how paranoid this is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you seriously not see how paranoid this is?

No offense....

You see paranoid because you're gullible. You trust the GOV too much. It kills indiscriminately abroad everyday. It couldn't possible ever turn on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you seriously not see how paranoid this is?

Call it what you will but in such a scenario this is how things will happen. It's just foresight. If you really pay attention to these conversations you'd know that I haven't called for revolution. You'd know that I hope that day doesn't happen. You should know that there may come a day when that needs to happen. Neither of us know when but the rules of history, governments and mankind dictate that it will. Maybe not in our lifetimes or our grandchildrens but it will come. More than anything these conversations are mostly US reminding ourselves and informing others of who is ultimately in charge of this nation. It is something everyone needs to know about.

Relax though. I don't even have a gun so how serious about near future revolution can I be? Though tensions are high and division is sharp so don't fool yourself into thinking it is impossible in our lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

besides.... the american GOV is bankrupt... not officially, but they're are by definition bankrupt. They can't pay their bills. They've over leveraged their taxpayer funded life style. There is some leverage though.... the US$. This is the reason the GOV cons its citizens into killing abroad daily. If the killing stops, the US$ crashes overnight. Take your pick.

Edited by acidhead
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's rather simple (as I did it myself) to interpret the Second Amendment as being "if you want to own a gun, be in a militia".

The coma after the militia isn't too caught your breath, it is to separate two subject in one amendment. Let me try to state it better than our founding fathers did. We the people have the right to form a militia, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed for it is necessary for a free state.. I don't understand where in the damn sentence that they wrote, the liberals and democrats ****ed up. The constitution was designed to limit the government, a gift to the people from our founding fathers. It is not designed to limit us, control us, the people. Get it through your thick head.

Edited by Uncle Sam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Banning assault rifles Law essentially says: If the individual chooses to shoot an assault rifle then the individual must join the GOV military.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Banning assault rifles Law essentially says: If the individual chooses to shoot an assault rifle then the individual must join the GOV military.

Exactly. We wouldn't be able to be on par with the military, secret service, homeland security when we decide to revolt and throw out our corrupt government. I been seeing a lot of traitors and cowards appearing in these threads, siding with those that want to remove our constitution. Thank god our forefathers saw this, told us to remain vigilant and keep trying to get through to them. Because if we didn't have those wise words behind what we say, I don't know if there would be any people inspired to stand up and try to help other Americans out of the fog of deception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

besides.... the american GOV is bankrupt... not officially, but they're are by definition bankrupt.

acid you know better, this is simply not possible. The US can print its own money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We wouldn't be able to be on par with the military, secret service, homeland security when we decide to revolt

The day you decide that, you best make sure there's a good supply of body bags for you and your anti-American comrades. Our government doesn't take kindly to overthrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

acid you know better, this is simply not possible. The US can print its own money.

Instead of keeping gold and money pegged together, never creating more money unless we have more gold, the government decided printing more money to inflate the value of the dollar bill. So instead of exchanging one dollar bill for gold, we have to exchange thousands of dollar bills for that piece of gold. You know how bad that is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its as easy as opening a phone book...

http://constitution.org/mil/mil_us.htm

But the 2nd Amendment says no such thing as...

It actually says

Hats lets itleast quote it correctly.

I know that's what it SAYS, but what it means is what's under debate and what the main clause is - whether it's the militia bit or the shall not be infringed bit.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

acid you know better, this is simply not possible. The US can print its own money.

Yes they can... though the US$ worth is valued through confidence to uphold its strength as the worlds reserve currency. This is the reason the GOV cons its citizens into killing abroad daily. If the killing stops, the US$ crashes overnight. Take your pick. Keep killing abroad or face reality back home.

Edited by acidhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We the people have the right to form a militia, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed for it is necessary for a free state.

it's amazing that someone who claims to defend the constitution can't even get the text he's whining about correct. :whistle:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But isn't that right already infringed?

Background checks are an infringement, not allowing criminals and the mentally unsound to have them is an infringement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Hats

the shall not be infringed bit

I dont know why this part would be under debate.

We went over State Constitutions last night which individually have seperated what their particular militia consists of. For instance in Oregon BOR:

Section 27. Right to bear arms; military subordinate to civil power. The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power[.]

Thats clear enough for me.

Edited by AsteroidX
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acid you know better, this is simply not possible. The US can print its own money.

Just because you can print money doesnt make it legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be under debate because, first of all, it's already been infringed by background checks, and secondly if the "militia" bit is the important part, then the members of that militia would constiutionally have uninfringed access but not those outside the militia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But isn't that right already infringed?

Background checks are an infringement, not allowing criminals and the mentally unsound to have them is an infringement.

Yes. This is an infringement. Each case of an individual to have the right to bear arms removed is suppose to be done on a case by case basis in a judicial manner. So we are definitely violating this part of it. Although I think we can all agree (I hope) that within those groups mentioned there are those that should have there right to bear arms removed individually in a judicial manner. This process has been available since the 2nd Amendment and possibly before. I dont have the document in front me.

But blanket exclusions without oversight is a huge infringement of the second amendment.

As for background checks. If theres to be exclusions then one must ensure those excluded are not allowed to bear arms. In the old days it was the LEO's or the "posse" that enforced it. And the punishments were quite severe if you do your homework. Including disfigurement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It should be under debate because, first of all, it's already been infringed by background checks, and secondly if the "militia" bit is the important part, then the members of that militia would constiutionally have uninfringed access but not those outside the militia.

In my State every able bodied person is a member of the State militia by the Bill of Rights definition. I cannot speak for your states BOR in regards to this issue. So yes the Federal government is and has been violating our 2nd Amendment Rights and now wishes to further infringe upon it.

I am going to refrain to bring up other parts of the Federal Constitution that are being violated for now as we are talking about the 2nd amendment but when I talk of infringment to me it means moire then only the 2nd Amerndment issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my State every able bodied person is a member of the State militia by the Bill of Rights definition.

Well there you go.

Learn something new everyday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's amazing that someone who claims to defend the constitution can't even get the text he's whining about correct. :whistle:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

You sure do love your cherry picking. Apparently you didn't even read or understand my paragraph correctly. Did you ever take reading comprehension?

The coma after the militia isn't too caught your breath, it is to separate two subject in one amendment. Let me try to state it better than our founding fathers did. We the people have the right to form a militia, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed for it is necessary for a free state.. I don't understand where in the damn sentence that they wrote, the liberals and democrats ****ed up. The constitution was designed to limit the government, a gift to the people from our founding fathers. It is not designed to limit us, control us, the people. Get it through your thick head.

If you are not willing to understand what I said, you are here for only one thing, to troll me and others.

Edited by Uncle Sam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.