Declaration of Independence was illegal

[Persia]

The Declaration Of Independence May Have Been Totally Illegal, But Wasn’t That Kind Of The Point

http://www.philebrity.com/2011/10/20/the-declaration-of-independence-may-have-been-totally-illegal-but-wasnt-that-kind-of-the-point/

Stars and gripes: Declaration of Independence was illegal, claim British lawyers

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2051805/Declaration-Independence-illegal-claim-British-lawyers.html

[Princess Serenity]

Pfff. To bad. We declared independence from The British Empire in 1777. And kicked their butts too WITHOUT A PROPER ARMY. We became our own country. So get over it. Someone's still butt hurt.

[questionmark]

ehm... yes...so sue us. Last time you guyz send the sheriff to enforce British law it ended with a good whacking as I recall...

[_Only]

Just in case some don't read the whole article and find the context, the meeting between the countries lawyers seemed mostly a "tongue in cheek" debate, and in the end "a vote was held and it was decided that the U.S. would survive for another day and maintain its independence."

Hurray!

Edited October 23, 2011 by Jerry Only

[preacherman76]

LOL, that is so funny.

[Grandpa Greenman]

Ya it was funny ha ha... we still kicked your butts.

[Lilly]

Well Duh, of course it was illegal. Heck, I suspect it was treason. Had the Patriots lost they'd have found themselves swinging from that Libery Tree!

[GreatFenris]

Declaration of Independence Totally Illegal.

The war that followed and utterly humiliated the British Empire: Totally Legal.

Or?

[Gunn]

The Founding Fathers are probably turning over in their graves right now and saying: Really? I thought we got past all of this people...cooome oooooooon!

[SilverCougar]

Ya it was funny ha ha... we still kicked your butts.

Aaaactually... *snickers* We didn't win because we "kicked their butts" We won because they were going broke. There was a war starting between the Brits and France, so they couldn't afford to have two wars going at the same time. And while they really wanted to keep the colonies, they hated the French more. So instead they cut their losses with the states and went to focus on France. XD

[questionmark]

Aaaactually... *snickers* We didn't win because we "kicked their butts" We won because they were going broke. There was a war starting between the Brits and France, so they couldn't afford to have two wars going at the same time. And while they really wanted to keep the colonies, they hated the French more. So instead they cut their losses with the states and went to focus on France. XD

Correct, it was the first time in history that an Army lost battle after battle but at the end won the war.

But I was referring more to 1812 when the Brits wanted a second round

[lightly]

It was certainly illegal. Speaking of illegal... or legal... do WE the People have a legal right to revolt? .. against OUR government? ¿ ?

[SilverCougar]

*grins and winks at Quest*

Lightly I believe there is in the constitution that gives the people the right to rise up against the government should it start doing what is not right towards The People.

[Indiogene]

Next thing you know, the 10-12 Southern states plus Texas itself a "Republic" and Indian Territory thrown in there sues the US govt. and ratted on the Obama administration to the UN declaring themselves "still a sovereign" independent countries. The Confederacy is back and Dixie: 150 years and counting (talk about bringing up old grudges), but southerners respond "that's a bridge crossed over waters" over the Potomac where the Union, er nation's capital sits, more like what's in the past is done. Nowadays, virtually all 50 states and US territories declare themselves "sovereign" have states rights have more priority over federal law, and I can think of New Hampshire and Vermont really threaten to hold an election to secede from the union.

Louisiana was purchased by the US in 1803 when Napoleon decided to make a peace deal to keep the US out of war, but the French briefly didn't have the Louisiana territory from 1763 to 1800 when Spain was in charge of the land stretching from the Red Rivers (in Oklahoma and the Dakotas) to the Mississippi or Missouri rivers to east of the Rocky Mountains or up to the Cascades in the Pacific northwest, or I believe the Arkansas river in Kansas or Colorado. The piece of valued land was what made the US double in size and power two centuries later, including the annexation of the desert Southwest and West Coast in the Mexican-American war (1846-1850). Today, you have many Mexican nationalists in Mexico demand the return of some fair amount of land in our border states.

Edited October 23, 2011 by DeMikeDe

[Farmer77]

It was certainly illegal. Speaking of illegal... or legal... do WE the People have a legal right to revolt? .. against OUR government? ¿ ?

Some would say we not only have the right but we have the DUTY to revolt.

Um but just incase big brother is reading this I would NEVER say someting like that

[darkmoonlady]

I say we gladly accept it was totally illegal and then say we're wholly owned by Britain including our debt..hehe.

[lightly]

*grins and winks at Quest*

Lightly I believe there is in the constitution that gives the people the right to rise up against the government should it start doing what is not right towards The People.

Hi SilverCougar, I dug around a little... It looks like we don't really have a legal right to revolt. We are expected to use our rights of assembly and petition. This was sort of interesting :

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/psa/sec18.htm

The third sentence of the Declaration of Independence reads:

That to secure these rights [to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness], governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

This paragraph continues, counseling against use of this right "for light and transient causes". However, a "long train of abuses and usurpations", especially one "evincing a design to reduce [the people] under absolute despotism" suffices to trigger not only the right, but also the duty, "to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their future security".

No comparable language is to be found in the federal constitution; the only right to alter or abolish government found expressed there is the AC. We almost had such language in the constitution, however. James Madison proposed to insert the following language,[Note 1] strongly asserting

That the people have an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform or change their Government, whenever it may be found adverse or inadequate to the purposes of its institution.

blah blah blah....

[Corp]

Correct, it was the first time in history that an Army lost battle after battle but at the end won the war.

But I was referring more to 1812 when the Brits wanted a second round

You are mistaken. It was the Americans who wanted a second round in 1812 and promptly got pimped slapped

As for the OP...duh. The Americans were in open revolt. And if the Brits hadn't been morons and had the will to stamp out the rebellion before France, Spain, and the Dutch jumped in the Founding Father would have been executed in front of cheering crowds. Though losing did have its upside since it freed up a lot of cash for the Brits.