In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Constitutional Provisions for Tuesday's Attack
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Constitutional Provisionsfor Tuesday's AttackWilliam Michael Kemp 09.13.01 http://www.sierratimes.com/archive/files/sep/13/arwmk091301.htm
The question has been asked-- 'In light of this "act of war", how are we to respond?' Declarations of War are classically reserved for other nations... and it does not appear that we have an identifiable "nation" upon which to declare war.Our founders realized that some insults to our nation would not be perpetrated by formal nations. And they made provision for it.I would suggest that you refer to the Constitution, Article I, section 8, clause 10 and clause 11.Article IClause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;We have witnessed an offence against the Law of Nations.Our proper course is not to send missiles at aspirin factories in foreign lands. Our proper course is to get our information straight, and in unassailable form. THEN we set forth a Bill of Particulars... then we issue letters of marque, for action against seaborne offenders; we issue letters of reprisal, against land-based criminals. These may be issued to our own military, or to civilian groups. In this way, we address a situation internationally which has mirrored our domestic situation-- our government has fallen into the practice of assaulting citizens without proper warrant, exclusive of law. Internationally, we have undertaken a "police action" in Korea; we have had excursions into the Dominican Republic, into Panama, into Granada, we have carried out a war in Viet Nam without declaration-- that makes us no different than pirates. There IS a means set forth by the founders, in the Constitution, to address matters where a declaration of war is not appropriate. That proper course is a letter of reprisal, so that we may remain a nation of law.
The question has been asked-- 'In light of this "act of war", how are we to respond?' Declarations of War are classically reserved for other nations... and it does not appear that we have an identifiable "nation" upon which to declare war.Our founders realized that some insults to our nation would not be perpetrated by formal nations. And they made provision for it.I would suggest that you refer to the Constitution, Article I, section 8, clause 10 and clause 11.Article IClause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;We have witnessed an offence against the Law of Nations.Our proper course is not to send missiles at aspirin factories in foreign lands. Our proper course is to get our information straight, and in unassailable form. THEN we set forth a Bill of Particulars... then we issue letters of marque, for action against seaborne offenders; we issue letters of reprisal, against land-based criminals. These may be issued to our own military, or to civilian groups. In this way, we address a situation internationally which has mirrored our domestic situation-- our government has fallen into the practice of assaulting citizens without proper warrant, exclusive of law. Internationally, we have undertaken a "police action" in Korea; we have had excursions into the Dominican Republic, into Panama, into Granada, we have carried out a war in Viet Nam without declaration-- that makes us no different than pirates. There IS a means set forth by the founders, in the Constitution, to address matters where a declaration of war is not appropriate. That proper course is a letter of reprisal, so that we may remain a nation of law.