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.

AN ACT OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
edited December 2001 in General Discussion
AN ACT OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCESTANLEY FOR U.S. SENATE By RICK STANLEY (DENVER) At 12:15 pm today, December 15, 2001, Rick Stanley, Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senate, was arrested by the Denver police for insisting that his constitutional right to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed. After delivering a speech detailing the reasons for his actions (attached, below), Rick performed an act of civil disobedience by openly carrying a loaded weapon, in a holster, in violation of Denver Revised Municipal Code section 38-117.5(b). Stanley believes that this city ordinance is unconsti- tutional. It infringes citizens' rights protected by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It is also in direct violation of Article II, Section 13 of the Colorado constitution.Duncan Philp, another true patriot determined to protect the right of all citizens to keep and bear arms, was also arrested for carrying a weapon openly. At present, both Mr. Philp and Mr. Stanley are being held in the Denver City Jail awaiting booking.Mr. Paul Grant, a lawyer specializing in constitutional law who has argued several cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, will be representing these men. Rick will demand a jury trial. He fully intends to demonstrate that this ordinance is unconstitutional, and that it cannot legally be enforced.Saturday, December 15, 2001, is the 210th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights. In honor of this auspicious occasion, Rick Stanley delivered the following speech.Rick also violated the Revised Municipal Code of the city and county of Denver, chapter 38-117.5(b), which prohibits the open carry of deadly weapons within the city limits. Rick wants to prove that this ordinance is unconstitutional. But he can't sue the city until he's been "damaged" by the ordinance. That is why he engaged in this act of civil disobedience: to obtain "standing" to sue the city for violating his constitutionally protected rights.WHAT THE SECOND AMENDMENT MEANSGood afternoon, and thank you for coming. It would appear I don't stand alone. (Rick brandishes a "Star Wars" toy gun.) This is what Denver will allow me to defend myself with. (Rick shoots rubber flying discs at the crowd. The crowd rolls on the ground with hilarity, and roars its approval.)My name is Rick Stanley. I'm a Libertarian candidate for the office of United States Senator. I'm here today to celebrate the 210th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights. More specifically, I want to tell you what the Second Amendment means to me, and, more importantly, what it means to America. I want to discuss the many ways in which our sitting government is destroying the Second Amendment. And I want to tell you what you can do to restore our Second Amendment rights.The Bill of Rights is the crown jewel in the Constitution of the United States. And the Second Amendment is the linchpin of the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment says, "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."Why did our forefathers add this provision to the Constitution? Well, they had direct experience with a tyrannical government. Just eight years before the Bill of Rights was ratified they had concluded peace with Great Britain, successfully ending their seven-year War for Independence. To understand the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, we must remember the basic political philosophy on which our nation was founded. That philosophy is set out brilliantly in the Declaration of Independence. I'm sure those stirring words are familiar to all of you."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That, to secure these Rights, 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 to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to secure their Safety and Happiness."Now it should be obvious that the people's right to alter or abolish a government that has become destructive of its basic ends would not mean much if the people didn't actually have the means to carry out the alteration. In other words, the Declaration of Independence wouldn't really say much without the Second Amendment. The people have the right to alter or abolish their government. And the people have another right -- to keep and bear arms. These two rights are essentially the same thing. The founding fathers knew this. When they wrote the Constitution, they hoped the government they were framing would always remain true to the purposes for which it had been instituted. But they had studied history, and they were wise, so they knew it was very likely that the government of the United States would become onerous and oppressive at some time in the future. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness were, to them, the most important possessions anyone can hold. And so they very wisely included the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. They hoped that their descendants would never again be forced to overthrow an evil government. But they knew it might happen, so they inserted an escape clause in our Bill of Rights.Today, 210 years after the Bill of Rights became part of the Constitution, the Second Amendment is in tatters. Let's stop and think, for a moment, of the many ways in which this current unconstitutional government has infringed our right to keep and bear arms.- Counting state, local, and federal laws and regulations, there are now over 20,000 separate rules regulating the use, possession, and transfer of firearms. Most of those rules are patent infringements of this most basic human right, to keep and bear arms in self-defense.- The federal government has adopted many laws which violate the Second Amendment. Automatic weapons are subject to a special tax. People who want to buy or sell guns are required to ask for permission. Guns with large magazines are prohibited. Every one of these restrictions is an infringement of your right to keep and bear arms.- Federal law also includes prohibitions against certain kinds of ammunition. Specifically, "armor-piercing" bullets are illegal. Guns with very short barrels are also illegal. The net effect? The very types of guns and ammunition the American people must have to defend our country against a self-proclaimed military dictator are not freely available. But they should be! And they must be, if freedom is to endure.- State and local laws in many jurisdictions prohibit concealed carry. People who wish to carry a concealed weapon are required to obtain a license, or permit. In many cities these licenses are never issued. People can apply for them, but the government won't issue them.The Second Amendment does not say that people can apply for permission to keep and bear arms. It says that you have the right to keep and bear arms. It does not say "except for concealed weapons." It says that you have the right to bear arms. It's your right, and so it must be your choice. You -- not the government -- can decide what kind of gun you need, and when you need it, and how you want to carry it. As long as you use it only for lawful purposes -- for self-defense -- the government has absolutely no lawful authority to restrict your Second Amendment right.- Here in Denver the city council has adopted a particularly odious piece of legislation known as Chapter 38-117.5(b) of the Revised Municipal Code. This unconstitutional piece of garbage says that citizens are not allowed to bear arms within the city limits. The traitors on the city council passed this ordinance even though they knew all about the Second Amendment. They knew all about Article II, Section 13 of the constitution of Colorado, which says, "The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, and property, ... shall be called in question." Why did they pass this unconstitutional ordinance? Because they don't care about you, or your rights, or the Constitution. They only care about power over other people -- obtaining it, extending it, and grasping it. They want to run your life. And they know that you might resist them if you have a gun. They're not ready to say you can't even own a gun. Not yet. But they do say that you can't carry it with you. Small steps. Infringements. Tyranny-- an inch at a time.Unlike the Denver city council, I care about the Constitution. I believe that your rights, and my rights, and everybody's rights, are important. An unconstitutional enactment is not a law. Today I am challenging this unconstitutional ordinance by violating it deliberately and peacefully. But before I do that and the Denver police take me into custody, I want to tell you what you can do to make the Second Amendment a living, breathing reality once again.- Elect Libertarians to public office. If you're not registered to vote, go out and register. Vote for Libertarians every chance you get. They're all about defending the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.- Join my campaign team. I am a candidate for the office of U.S. Senator. The election will be held next November. My campaign team is already hard at work. But it's pitifully small, and under-funded. Join my team, and help elect me to the U.S. Senate so I can start fighting for your rights at the federal level. You can talk to David Bryant or Michelle Konieczny -- they're here today. Or visit my web site the next time you're online: www.stanley2002.org. - Help spread the word about what has happened here today all across America. I am issuing a public call for monthly public demonstrations in support of the Bill of Rights. The Second American Revolution has already begun. It is time to spread it to every state in America.Today I am taking a stand against an unconstitutional city ordinance. There are thousands of unconstitutional laws on the books today. Now is the time to force their repeal. We need to hold another rally here in Denver in January, and in February, and every month after that, until all the unconsti- tutional laws have been repealed. And we can't just do it in Denver. We need support in this effort from people all across the country.I am calling upon citizens all across America to join the Second American Revolution. Organize a rally in your hometown. Set one up in the capital city of your state. Speak out against all the unconstitutional laws this sitting government has enacted. And don't stop there. Do it again, and again, and again -- until all the unconstitutional laws have been repealed.When these rallies are happening regularly, in every capital city of every state in America, the politicians will have to sit up and listen. They know they have been passing unconsti- tutional laws. They don't want to listen when Libertarians say that what they're doing is wrong. Well, dammit, the time for whispering is behind us. We have got to shout our message from the rooftops, before it's too late. If we don't act now, our last best chance to preserve liberty in America will be lost. Do not let that happen!- I know that there are many militia groups in America. The politicians and their media lapdogs have been poking fun at them for years. You militia members deserve respect. You know more about the Second Amendment, and what it truly means, than all the politicians inside the Beltway put together.It is time for all the militia groups in America to band together. The battle for liberty can still be won with ballots, not bullets. But the danger is imminent. The recently enacted "Patriot Act" is a direct assault upon the entire Bill of Rights. The traitors in Washington are getting bolder. We must be ready to defend our liberty with all the force at our command, if they push it that far.I'm calling out today for the formation of a new Second American Revolution militia, to embrace all the militias across America. I've already read you part of the Declaration of Independence -- the most familiar part. Now I'd like to read the next two sentences, the part the politicians want you to forget about."Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."Think about the "Patriot Act." Think about the thousands of unconstitutional laws this sitting government has enacted. It is a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object: to reduce you, and me, and all Americans, under absolute Despotism.It is our right, it is our duty, to throw off this unconstitutional government. I'm ready to do my duty. Are you? http://www.armedfemalesofamerica.com/archive.php?aid=149

Comments

  • Evil ATFEvil ATF Member Posts: 1,195 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    What balls! What a show of selfless generosity!Just when you think the world doesn't have anymore heroes, this man comes along. God bless him.
    Got President? Evil in 2012!"They may kill me, but there will always be more like me".
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I like the idea of arguing it in front of a jury. Judges always recite the fallacy that it is about a national guard. But with a jury of ignorants, being pelted over and over again with facts and history, it is possible they can see the light.
    Happiness is a warm gun
  • TXLoaderTXLoader Member Posts: 2 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Too bad the judges won't allow juries to do their primary work first: To actually weigh the constitutionality of the law the arrest was made under. Today, that work is deemed to be the exclusive realm of the judicial branch, whereas when this country was founded, a law deemed unconstitutional by a jury would set a man free. Common sense no longer prevails, it seems.If I sat on the jury, I'd acquit the man on the basis the law he was arrested under violates the plain reading of the 2nd Amendment.TXLoader
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Dang, just when I would have voted for him as senator, he had to go and do that.Well I guess I'll just have to vote Republican again.
  • Evil ATFEvil ATF Member Posts: 1,195 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    WTF are you talking about, Turbo? You don't think he's earned your vote?
  • Mark IIMark II Member Posts: 247 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    If I lived in Colorado, I know who I'd vote for. If all Libertarians have these beliefs, I think there will be one less Republican in 2004.
    "To meet with ill fortune is to meet with good fortune. To meet with submission is to meet an enemy."Mark_II@gunbroker.zzn.com
  • REBJrREBJr Member Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Wow!, I got goosebumps from reading that.
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Just cause he went an broke the law, doesn't make him eligible to hold elected office.I'm interested in other issues, that are just as important as the 2d amendment.Libertarian Party wants to legalize drugs, but have no answers as to how they would deal with the resulting drug addiction and the crime wave which would follow, I assume that they would allow the government to sell the drugs to anyone who desires to have it.Those that don't work but like the substance would do what they do now, steal, and commit other crimes to feed their habit.And since it would be lawful to buy drugs, no one would be held accountable for crimes commited while under the influence, as it's government sanctioned legal product. Crime would rise above previously posted heights.It wasn't my fault, would be the defense of every person, caught breaking the law while under the influence; they say mandatory drug rehab for all users, (at governments expense, of course). We have mandatory court ordered drug intervention programs that don't work today. What makes anyone think they will work when drugs are legalized. It's a joke.What about the tobacco companies that have shelled out millions for ruined lives and overburdening the health system in this country, would it be fair to collect from those corporations and allow others who produce and sell for profit drugs that are just as dangerous to the health and well being of our nations people.The Libertarian Party sounds like it has the answers to many of the concerns we all have, however if you examine there position with a little critical evaluation of the subject matter you will find them lacking, in better solutions to the same prolems which exist now, and will multiply afterwards, with such legalization standards.You say young people won't become as susceptible to addiction if it were legalized?; look at tobacco, the study's done in this country, tells us young people are smoking more than ever before, in spite of the advertisements warning everybody of the health risks.I'm not impressed, this guy, needs publicity to get elected, getting arrested, gives him free frontline news.This party swayed the election towards Bush this last time cause more democrats crossed over to vote for Nader, and we lost in 92' because of Perot.This means they know what buttons to push to impress those of us that don't want to step back and look at the whole picture.We don't need more laws, what we need is to have citizens obeying the laws and the government enforcing the laws on the books.If the citizens of this town in Colorado, are concerned about the second amendment, why don't they change their law by replacing the governing board.Don't make the same mistake made in 1992, the Libertarian partys agenda makes them "liberals" siding with conservative issues, remember and think who their man was in these last elections, Pat Buchanan and he never said one ioda about 2d amendment rights. I say pay attention to the people this party draws, and you might see some familiar faces. [This message has been edited by turbo (edited 12-19-2001).]
  • .250Savage.250Savage Member Posts: 812 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Mm. Valid points, tho I think more kids are smoking only because adults have gone so brainlessly ballistic over the use of a non-mood altering drug. Tell a kid not to do something, and he will go out of his way to defy you. I sure did, just like I'm sure all of you did. On the subject of real drugs, tho, the countries which have experimented with legalization haven't had real encouraging results. It may, however, offer a viable alternative to the failed, massively expensive, and life-destroying "drug war". In any event, the Libertarians are on the right page in the gun fight, and for that, I thank and salute them. If I finally get completely disgusted with the Republicans, this is where my party affiliation is going. Maybe it was just a publicity ploy, but I agree with Evil ATF; what balls! Ever forward!
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    TURBO- Good points. And lets not forget the Libertarians dispicable pro abortion stand. Give me a party that wants to revive the 9th and tenth amendments, and that is the party that I will support.
    Happiness is a warm gun
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Not to mention their position on the death penalty.Pro abortion, anti death peanlty????This reminds me of the Camel cigaretts, "the thinking mans cigarett".When someone asked a camel smoker why he smoked camels? His response was "cause everybody else, does.. Over and Out.
  • Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    U.S. Senate Candidate Released from JailA news release and media AdvisoryDecember 17, 2001FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEDecember 17, 2001NEWS RELEASE & MEDIA ADVISORYStanley for U.S. SenateWeb site - http://www.stanley2002.org Contact: Michelle Konieczny,Campaign Office: 303.329.0481Email: michelle@stanley2002.org========================================================================Stanley Released from Jail; Charged with Violating an UnconstitutionalGun-Control OrdinanceLibertarian candidate for U.S. Senate, Rick Stanley, was released from Denver Police custody on Sunday, December 16, 2001 after being charged with violating a local gun-control ordinance. Stanley contends the law he is charged under violates his civil rights and he will be seeking a jury trial to have the ordinance declared unconstitutional. Second Amendment supporter Duncan Philp was also arrested and faces an identical charge.Stanley and Philp were arrested Saturday during a Bill of Rights rally being held in Denver's Lincoln Park, after they performed a planned act of civil disobedience by openly carrying a loaded handgun in a holster upon their hip. Both Stanley and Philp, stated their actions were an attempt to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed rights under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article II Section 13 of the Colorado Constitution. They are now facing one count each of unlawfully carrying a deadly weapon in violation of Denver's Revised Municipal Code, 38-117.5(b).Paul Grant, a civil rights attorney who will be representing both men is optimistic about their chances in court. On Saturday Grant stated, "There's absolutely no way a judge should be able to uphold Denver's ordinance in light of the state constitution". Public support and attention would be an essential part of the case, said Grant who has argued cases on several different occasions before the Supreme Court. He urged all supporters to attend these men's court dates and to speak out publicly on this issue explaining that; "Jurors must realize how important this case is". Mr. Stanley's next court date is Wednesday, January 30, 2002, 8:30 AM, Courtroom 151P, in the County Courts Building located at 1437 Bannock Street in Denver.
    MEDIA ADVISORY:The Stanley for U.S. Senate campaign will be holding an informal press conference on Monday, December 17, 2001, at 6:00 PM. All members of the media are invited to attend to learn more about the case, and this candidate for U.S. Senate who is truly different from all the rest. The conference will be held at the campaign office located at 6280 E. 39th Avenue in Denver. For directions please call the campaign office at 303.329.0481. Mr. Stanley is also available for personal interviews by calling the same number.##30## http://www.stanley2002.org/release12_16_01.htm
  • jazzjazz Member Posts: 83 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    My kind 'a' guy. If he runs, he'll definitelyhave my vote!
  • LowriderLowrider Member Posts: 6,587
    edited November -1
    "...if drugs were legalized nobody would be held accountable for things they do while under the influence?"Alcohol is legal and people are sure as hell liable for things they do while drunk.
    Lord Lowrider the LoquaciousMember:Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets She was only a fisherman's daughter,But when she saw my rod she reeled.
  • Evil ATFEvil ATF Member Posts: 1,195 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thank you, Lowrider. You beat me to my own point. Let me tell you something, Turbo. The Second Amendment should be your first, last and only voting issue. I'm a pro-gun, anti-abortion, anti-drug, anti-socialism kind of guy. But, when it gets down to brass tacks, the Second Amendment outshines them all. Without the Second, we have no guarantee of the rest. One issue at a time, amigo. Get the gun laws repealed, then we can tackle the other, less important stuff.
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Lowrider and ATF- The idea of legalization is besides the point. The federal government should not be making any laws with respect to drug use, legAL OR ILLEGAL. And I would just assume not support a party that claims to be a party based on liberty and the constitution, yet feels it is appropriate to have a blanket law about legalization of drugs, and abortion that would be binding on the states. This to me is a clear violation of the tenth amendment. Sure the present system ignores the tenth, but so do libertarians. Society does need laws which some claim are steeped in morality and safety. To have a policy which disallows states to make laws as they see fit is completely unconstitutional.
    Happiness is a warm gun
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Eatf, LowrdrYou didn't get the point, the constitution revolves around EVERYBODY having rights.We have the right to bear arms, so long as we use them lawfully, and do not infringe others persons rights, this is called respect for the rights of others.People that drink and drive, do drugs and drive, have no regard for other peoples rights, as it against the law.In recent court rulings even the US Supreme Court has ruled no government agency, or entity can sue a manufacturor of lawful products, speaking of the firearms manufacturers,which ruling, I would argue protects tabacco companies, providing they advertise as they dur today, "Smoking maybe Dangerous to you Health"If drugs were legalized the using of these drugs, knowing that they have of way of altering peoples minds, give the users committing crimes a perfect excuse for evading justice, after all "I was out of my mind" or, "I didn't know what I was doing" would be their defence. And it stands to reason that anyone out of their rightful minds while commiting a crime can not and should not be held accountable. It's the American way, isn't it.What foolishness.I'm sorry, but the way I see it, the Constitution doesn't revolve around the "right of the people to bear arms"; it's the other way around, that right, together with all other rights wich "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence Promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty" are primary, because they are inclusive of all the people. The right of an infant citizen to bear or carry can't help him till he is able to use it to protect himself.The thing that garauntees every citizens right was pruchased with the blood of those that took arms to insure all of our rights, and in order to (give us an even more powerfull weapon, the right to VOTE) continue enjoying these we have a duty to vote for lawmakers and government officials that will insure the continuance of these rights.We have lost ground in the past because we have not been very judicious about our picks for lawmakers. This the real weapon that needs to be used. You want protection, VOTE. I am not disagreeing with anyone that the 2d Amendment isn't important, however everyone has a right to live without fear of having to deal with drugs addicts, assaulting and commiting crimes to feed their habits.Of course if your for, the drugs being provided free, that is a diferent story.What a fiasco that would be.Getting back to original post, our man here needs the publicity as I said before, otherwise he wouldn't have waited until he was running for office to make himself a martyr on this issue.Patriots don't ack out of selfishness, or personal gain. He wants recognition and your vote, so he can hopefully get elected. I wouldn't vote for someone just because he made a stance as he did, on the other hand had he done this before he entered the senate race, I'd have more respect for him, I have nothing against him, just his motives, if some you hold a guy like this in awe, thats all an well, but there is more to it than just "bearing arms", there are other civic duties we must excersize which are just as important.I say, stand back an take a good look at what their parties agenda is. They are pro abortion, anti death penalty, which means, drug addicts who committed murder while under the influence, would be slapped on the hand and let free after serving a few years, just as they do it to drunk drivers that kill other motrists today. When was the last time you heard of one of them having to pay the ultimate for driving and taking inocent lives while under the influence. And thats the point, drug addicition is already recognized as a disease, no one is goig to judge a sick person, but watch out if you make a mistake on your tax return.There are many other issues, but I've chosen these two, because they are not sensible, and go against the common sense viewpoints of justice.Just one mans viewpoint.[This message has been edited by turbo (edited 12-19-2001).]
Sign In or Register to comment.