The Right to Shoot Tyrants, Not Deer
Posted 12 January 2013 - 10:02 PM
The essence of humanity is freedom. Government — whether voted in peacefully or thrust upon us by force — is essentially the negation of freedom. Throughout the history of the world, people have achieved freedom when those in power have begrudgingly given it up. From the assassination of Julius Caesar to King John’s forced signing of the Magna Carta, from the English Civil War to the triumph of the allies at the end of World War II, from the fall of communism to the Arab Spring, governments have permitted so-called nobles and everyday folk to exercise more personal freedom as a result of their demands for it and their fighting for it. This constitutes power permitting liberty.
The American experience was the opposite. Here, each human being is sovereign, as the colonists were after the Revolution. Here, the delegation to the government of some sovereignty — the personal dominion over self — by each American permitted the government to have limited power in order to safeguard the liberties we retained. Stated differently, Americans gave up some limited personal freedom to the new government so it could have the authority and resources to protect the freedoms we retained. Individuals are sovereign in America, not the government. This constitutes liberty permitting power.
Yet we did not give up any natural rights; rather, we retained them. It is the choice of every individual whether to give them up. Neither our neighbors nor the government can make those choices for us, because we are all without the moral or legal authority to interfere with anyone else’s natural rights. Since the government derives all of its powers from the consent of the governed, and since we each lack the power to interfere with the natural rights of another, how could the government lawfully have that power? It doesn’t. Were this not so, our rights would not be natural; they would be subject to the government’s whims.
To assure that no government would infringe the natural rights of anyone here, the Founders incorporated Jefferson’s thesis underlying the Declaration into the Constitution and, with respect to self-defense, into the Second Amendment. As recently as two years ago, the Supreme Court recognized this when it held that the right to keep and bear arms in one’s home is a pre-political individual right that only sovereign Americans can surrender and that the government cannot take from us, absent our individual waiver.
Read more: http://p.washingtont.../#ixzz2HoxUxyEB
- AR-15 Panther PIE'd this
Posted 13 January 2013 - 09:28 PM
It was intended as humor, but since you mentioned it... FDR(100,000 Japanese Americans incarcerated without trial), GWB (Patriot Act), HO (Drone attack/targeting/killing Americans overseas without due process)? Seems like there is more than just one "someone doesn't understand what a right is", and it includes several "someones" that held/hold the highest office in the land.
Someone doesn't understand what a right is.
- awdeansr PIE'd this
Posted 13 January 2013 - 09:58 PM
The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
The mistake the US made was that the roundup of Japanese citizens was applied in too broad a manner during the hysteria that occurred after Pearl Harbor and the Niihau incident, and the fear of a Japanese invasion of the West Coast. They should have been rounded up selectively as the Italians and Germans were. The manner of the roundup opened them up to well founded accusations of racism.
As far as the drones, they are going after legitimate military targets, imo similar to Union ships firing on Confederate raiders during the civil war without warning or due process.
Posted 13 January 2013 - 10:13 PM
Posted 14 January 2013 - 01:04 AM
This argument only makes since if you legitimately think we have anything close to Joseph Stalin and/or a total gun ban on our hands. If you honestly believe that to be true, you are insane or very immature.
Posted 14 January 2013 - 01:35 AM
To call someone crazy for taking a position is in itself ignoring the other side of the same coin.
- SuperMan PIE'd this
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users