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.
Options
Confused about our right to new government
Waco Waltz
Member Posts: 10,828 ✭✭
Ever since the NATO intervention in Libya I've been confused. Obama seems to suggest it's the right of the people to throw off opressive government. That revolutions are legal but I remember all the talk in the 90's about how the Government classified civilians bearing arms as not elligible for the protections of the Geniva convention Etc. That if captured you were afforded no protections that soldiers from any given nation are to be afforded.
Yet the Administration goes on about war crimes in Libya. I did not know a war crime could be committed when there is really no war and when the rules of war do not apply to rebellions?
So when the Next American armed revolutions kicks off if ever will we be in a war with the protections of the rules or war or will POW's to Government forces be treated as insurgents?
I ask because the lines seem to be blurred.
J.T.
Yet the Administration goes on about war crimes in Libya. I did not know a war crime could be committed when there is really no war and when the rules of war do not apply to rebellions?
So when the Next American armed revolutions kicks off if ever will we be in a war with the protections of the rules or war or will POW's to Government forces be treated as insurgents?
I ask because the lines seem to be blurred.
J.T.
Comments
You have the right to oust the government with your vote, not by violence.
You might say there is no right to throw off a government with a voting process in place but what if the vote is controlled? What if the vote is done by fraud? What about Federal Agencies that rule outside the voting process? Or Obama's Executive orders?
I note in Libya that the % of active fighters was probably less then 2% of the population. The Libyan military seemed to take off their uniforms and sit it out.
quote:Originally posted by Classic095
As a revolutionary in this country you will become an enemy of the state... count on it. Only if you win will it be any different.[:(]
You have the right to oust the government with your vote, not by violence.
As a revolutionary in this country you will become an enemy of the state... count on it. Only if you win will it be any different.[:(]
You have the right to oust the government with your vote, not by violence.
I totally disagree. Why do you think the founders of this country included the 2nd amendment in the Constitution? Even Lincoln said in one of his speeches that Americans have the right to overthrow a corrupt government.
There's an old saying, "The winner gets to hold the war crimes trials." [:D]
As a revolutionary in this country you will become an enemy of the state... count on it. Only if you win will it be any different.[:(]
You have the right to oust the government with your vote, not by violence.
I suppose that makes you a Tory then.
Since congress has placed the Declaration of Independence at the head of the United States Code under The Organic Laws of the United States of America.
And the Declaration clearly states that- "But when a long train of abuses and usurpation's, 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."
Wouldn't that mean revolution is legal in this country.[?][:D]
The American Revolution began in about 1776. However, in 1783, there was a little dust-up known as Shay's Rebellion (Shay lost). What was the cause of that- that had John Hancock sending out the militia, and Washington to come out of retirement?
"The financial situation leading to the rebellion included the problem that European war investors (among others) demanded payment in gold and silver; there was not enough specie in the states, including Massachusetts, to pay the debts; and throughout the state, wealthy urban businessmen were trying to squeeze whatever assets they could get out of rural smallholders. Since the smallholders did not have the gold that the creditors demanded, everything they had was confiscated, including their houses.[6]
At a meeting convened by aggrieved commoners, a farmer, Plough Jogger, encapsulated the situation:
"I have been greatly abused, have been obliged to do more than my part in the war, been loaded with class rates, town rates, province rates, Continental rates and all rates...been pulled and hauled by sheriffs, constables and collectors, and had my cattle sold for less than they were worth...The great men are going to get all we have and I think it is time for us to rise and put a stop to it, and have no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor collectors nor lawyers."
Sound familiar?
Ever since the NATO intervention in Libya I've been confused. Obama seems to suggest it's the right of the people to throw off opressive government. That revolutions are legal but I remember all the talk in the 90's about how the Government classified civilians bearing arms as not elligible for the protections of the Geniva convention Etc. That if captured you were afforded no protections that soldiers from any given nation are to be afforded.
Yet the Administration goes on about war crimes in Libya. I did not know a war crime could be committed when there is really no war and when the rules of war do not apply to rebellions?
So when the Next American armed revolutions kicks off if ever will we be in a war with the protections of the rules or war or will POW's to Government forces be treated as insurgents?
I ask because the lines seem to be blurred.
J.T.
If we have another revolution and the government treats POWs as criminals (tried, executed, etc...) I can downright guarantee that any government forces or leaders captured will be tried and executed as well.
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
I guess no one has ever heard of the Declaration of Causes.
Just as seminal a document as the Declaration of Independence.
As a representative republic, it is not by consent of the governed, but rather consent of the governed through representation.
Otherwise it's a democracy.
Revolutionaries are traitors or subversives unless demonstrated otherwise, both against God and the ordained government.
You do not have a right to a new government just because you want one, no matter what the majority percentage feels that day.
That's why there is an electoral college, and why Lincoln went to war.
Heh heh, that ought to do it.
quote:Originally posted by 11b6r
Difference between revolution and rebellion? One of them was won by the Rebels.
The American Revolution began in about 1776. However, in 1783, there was a little dust-up known as Shay's Rebellion (Shay lost). What was the cause of that- that had John Hancock sending out the militia, and Washington to come out of retirement?
"The financial situation leading to the rebellion included the problem that European war investors (among others) demanded payment in gold and silver; there was not enough specie in the states, including Massachusetts, to pay the debts; and throughout the state, wealthy urban businessmen were trying to squeeze whatever assets they could get out of rural smallholders. Since the smallholders did not have the gold that the creditors demanded, everything they had was confiscated, including their houses.[6]
At a meeting convened by aggrieved commoners, a farmer, Plough Jogger, encapsulated the situation:
"I have been greatly abused, have been obliged to do more than my part in the war, been loaded with class rates, town rates, province rates, Continental rates and all rates...been pulled and hauled by sheriffs, constables and collectors, and had my cattle sold for less than they were worth...The great men are going to get all we have and I think it is time for us to rise and put a stop to it, and have no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor collectors nor lawyers."
Sound familiar?
50+ % of the voters elected our current government. Many members of our goverment were elected with 60% to 70% of the votes within their districts. If we the people, duly elected our current government, what right do we have to get pissy, take our ball and go whineing home to Mommy????
How do we have the right to rebel and take up arms against a legitemately elected government?? Don't forget, in a year we again have the chance to "Vote the bums out". If again we have pretty much the same government, didn't the people, AGAIN, speak? If we the people have spoken, once again, on what grounds do we take up arms and march on Washington??
We are all upset about the direction the country is going. OK, fine. This is the direction that the majority of the voters wanted us to go, right? Must be, they won the elections. Please explain to me what your grounds for revolution are.
The simple fact is, that our views are not winning at the ballot box. Again, I ask, what gives us the right to overthrow a duly elected government? If we attempt to overthrow a duly elected government does that not make us the same as any despotic dictator that ever took power?
Simple really.
When the voters are nullified by rampant voter fraud and vote-purchasing from the US Treasury in the form of entitlements, then what? If you're standing around waiting for crooked people to treat you right, you will have a long wait.
And what about the process that is now taking place, where Mexicans intend to use our own tax money to fund their having enough babies to change the demographics in this country so that they can win every election from the local school board, to controlling 2 branches of the federal government?
We aren't there yet but we are well on the way. Thinking that everything is going to some how turn out ok by itself, is a little like jumping off a 20 story building and that thinking that everything seems just fine as you pass the 10th floor at terminal velocity.
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof-
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
As used in this section, the terms "organizes" and "organize", with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.
Classic...did the English crown not have such laws, too? I'm pretty sure they thought ours was an illegal revolt.
When is enough...well, enough? Do you have a breaking point?
No, I am not advocating a violent overthrow of the government....just making conversation. I am seriously interested in your answers.
I guess no one has ever heard of the Declaration of Causes.
Just as seminal a document as the Declaration of Independence.
As a representative republic, it is not by consent of the governed, but rather consent of the governed through representation.
Otherwise it's a democracy.
Revolutionaries are traitors or subversives unless demonstrated otherwise, both against God and the ordained government.
You do not have a right to a new government just because you want one, no matter what the majority percentage feels that day.
That's why there is an electoral college, and why Lincoln went to war.
Heh heh, that ought to do it.
Why is it tax eaters think of their Government employers as God?[:(!]
Of course you have the right to rebel, but that right is upheld ONLY if you win. Otherwise you are a traitor and are subject to the full penalty.
There's an old saying, "The winner gets to hold the war crimes trials." [:D]
Yep.[^]
And realistically I believe the majority of armed forces and law enforcement will side with the government..Sort of 'I am not going to bite the hand that feeds me". Violating the oath would be treason..
There have been laws in place that circumvent the constitution for years, as all the amendments and additions and subtractions have taken away from it.
Basically all the constitution does really is denies the Federal government the right to do a few things in respect to the common man.
You know, like press a religion on them, deny them the right to bare arms, and print what they like. However State Constitutions are another subject and the states have more power to suppress, deny, and regulate things than the Federal Government..
Here in Florida we have been able to secure more and more of the 2nd amendment right than most states and are continueing or LEGAL battle daily..
In this day and age, I dont believe armed conflict solves a damn thing, many times the winner is worse than the loser as proven by history..Can we do it legally,, yes, but it will take a massive push with a lot of coordination. Can we do it violently,, I dont think so..But if that is what it comes down to then So Be IT..Im game.
It seems that all those federal agents that swear to up hold the defend the constitution are sitting on their thumbs.
quote:Originally posted by Classic095
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > ? 2385
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof-
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
As used in this section, the terms "organizes" and "organize", with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.
Can one really break the law by attempting to stop a government from breaking the law/constitution?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking for a fight, I just think at some point the government is gonna get one by virtue of their tyranny and ignoring their constitutional limitations.
quote:Originally posted by Classic095
All I am doing is pointing out the law in the United states.. I would imagine any revolutionary uprising against any government is illegal, and I do know it happens,, It may come to that again in this country if history is right about repeating itself. However I dont know too many people in this country that are willing to take the first bullet in an illegal activity.
And realistically I believe the majority of armed forces and law enforcement will side with the government..Sort of 'I am not going to bite the hand that feeds me". Violating the oath would be treason..
There have been laws in place that circumvent the constitution for years, as all the amendments and additions and subtractions have taken away from it.
Basically all the constitution does really is denies the Federal government the right to do a few things in respect to the common man.
You know, like press a religion on them, deny them the right to bare arms, and print what they like. However State Constitutions are another subject and the states have more power to suppress, deny, and regulate things than the Federal Government..
Here in Florida we have been able to secure more and more of the 2nd amendment right than most states and are continueing or LEGAL battle daily..
In this day and age, I dont believe armed conflict solves a damn thing, many times the winner is worse than the loser as proven by history..Can we do it legally,, yes, but it will take a massive push with a lot of coordination. Can we do it violently,, I dont think so..But if that is what it comes down to then So Be IT..Im game.
I am not pointing fingers, as I am as guilty as most of the rest of us. Why are we not running for local offices? That is where the elective process starts. Why are we not actively supporting our kind of local candidates, not just with a check but knocking on doors and making phone calls. It really does start locally. Those who win on the local town and County levels tend to run for State offices, than eventually they end up in Washington. If we had been working for good candidates 20-25 years ago, the Washington Rep. and Sen. might just look a whole lot different today.
Yes, I know, who has the time. I understand this. I like being at home with my wife and children more than anything. But many of us make time for hunting and shooting and all of our other pursuits and hobbies. So while we all sat at home helping with homework, watching TV and taking time for our hobbies, we let our country be stolen out from under our feet. I do not believe it is too late but I honestly believe we have the goverment we deserve by our inactions.
This is being done while all most of us do is * on a forum like GB. Like I said, I can't point fingers. It's been a long time since I did any campaign work for anyone, at least 25 years.
Sometimes things are relative. It's illegal to shoot a guy...but not if he's in your livingroom stealing your TV.
Can one really break the law by attempting to stop a government from breaking the law/constitution?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking for a fight, I just think at some point the government is gonna get one by virtue of their tyranny and ignoring their constitutional limitations.
quote:Originally posted by Classic095
All I am doing is pointing out the law in the United states.. I would imagine any revolutionary uprising against any government is illegal, and I do know it happens,, It may come to that again in this country if history is right about repeating itself. However I dont know too many people in this country that are willing to take the first bullet in an illegal activity.
And realistically I believe the majority of armed forces and law enforcement will side with the government..Sort of 'I am not going to bite the hand that feeds me". Violating the oath would be treason..
There have been laws in place that circumvent the constitution for years, as all the amendments and additions and subtractions have taken away from it.
Basically all the constitution does really is denies the Federal government the right to do a few things in respect to the common man.
You know, like press a religion on them, deny them the right to bare arms, and print what they like. However State Constitutions are another subject and the states have more power to suppress, deny, and regulate things than the Federal Government..
Here in Florida we have been able to secure more and more of the 2nd amendment right than most states and are continueing or LEGAL battle daily..
In this day and age, I dont believe armed conflict solves a damn thing, many times the winner is worse than the loser as proven by history..Can we do it legally,, yes, but it will take a massive push with a lot of coordination. Can we do it violently,, I dont think so..But if that is what it comes down to then So Be IT..Im game.
Said it better than I can. That was what I was trying to get at.