[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Slavery, American Style Due to the recent criminal events in Connecticut, certain rights are again in jeopardy. Almost immediately after the little ones in Newtown were sent home by a mentally ill killer, we are told that our gun rights need to be curtailed. We are told that the Supreme Court is likely to take up the question of gun rights, whether we have the right to carry a gun. We are told that we might not have the right to carry guns outside our houses and that the high court will decide. If the Supreme Court decides what our rights are, we have nine rulers, unelected oligarchs wearing black robes. Aren’t we supposed to have unalienable rights? Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, or as John Locke wrote, property? How did we get to the point of one black-robed person casting the deciding vote in Heller and MacDonald on what rights you do have, if any? Is the Supreme Court supposed to rule over us in such a manner? Three of the phenomena that erode liberty are the “living Constitution” concept, judicial review and the third and most powerful: emotional manipulation. Our modern institutions have become experts in mass psychology, manipulating millions of Americans on the basis of emotion, triggered by crimes such as the ones in Newtown. At the snap of a finger, the brain oatmealifies, the lips quiver and previously tough, self-reliant Americans clamor for the government to save them. The living Constitution concept was developed by Justices like Oliver Wendell Holmes. In the Missouri v. Holland decision, 252 U.S. 416 (1920), Holmes said this: “… we must realize that they have called into life a being the development of which could not have been foreseen completely by the most gifted of its begetters.” Does this statement sound familiar? I heard this almost verbatim from my latest federal airport molestation commissar two weeks ago. The founders could not have known about terrorists or anything we face today! We must therefore hand over our rights to the government. It will protect us. Do we have rights, or merely conveniences? The basic premise of this concept is that the meaning of the words used in the Constitution changes over time. Think about the meaning of the words “cool” or “radical”. What did they mean in 1900 versus today? What about “gay”? Is this what we want? Should our Constitution change like our pop culture vernacular? Tench Coxe, one of the founders, told us “The rifle, and every other terrible implement of war, is the natural birthright of every American.” Does that sound like they just meant muskets, as the revisionists tell us? Judicial review has also damaged our liberties. Hand in hand with the living Constitution is the means to implement change. Chief Justice John Marshall abrogated the power to tell us what the Constitution means, instead of telling us if the law is constitutional. The Supreme Court now interprets the Constitution, instead of telling us if a law conforms to the Constitution. This allows the meaning of our founding document to whipsaw back and forth, only dependent on the makeup of the Court. When the founders told us that our right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, did they mean that? Was there some other meaning? According to judicial review and our living Constitution, yes. The Supreme Court will tell us what the amendment means. And the next court will tell us something different. And on and on, ad nauseam. Why even bother writing the Second Amendment, Article I, Section 8, or Article II, Section 1, if the meaning was intended to change over time? Emotional manipulation was identified by Julius Caesar and Machiavelli. Whip up the emotions, and the people will hand over everything. Create a crisis, inflame the people, then deliver the solution. Prohibit guns in schools, watch a lunatic ignore the magic gun-free zone sign and kill 20 little children, then offer to prohibit all guns as the solution. Poke the Muslim horde in the eye while welcoming them into the country, then watch as they kill 3,000 of us. Offer less freedom as the solution. See how easy it is? If we are to sacrifice our rights at the first signs of crime or terrorism, why bother having them? What does it even mean to have rights? Where do they come from? Sadly, most Americans today happily relinquish them, because they think our rights come from the government, as if it were our creator. Our rights are given to us by God, not government. We should be free men, not slaves. Jay Stang is a U.S. Marine, volunteer Border Scout and board member of Oath Keepers. He owns several assault rifles that spew hundreds of rounds every second. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: echo5sierra (#0)
Post of the day
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken If you're not spewing, you're not trying. Get to the range and twitch it. “The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken All governments wish to disarm the citizens because armed citizens are a danger to evil governments.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||