• You are using the old High Contrast theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

If This Be Treason Make The Most Of It!

Status
Not open for further replies.

2dogs

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,865
Location
the city
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/03/10/edcb031003.htm

If This Be Treason Make The Most Of It!
By Claude A. Bohn

Regarding Robert Greenslade's article -
Can't say we weren't warned. "Aided by a little sophistry on the words 'general welfare,' (the federal branch claim) a right to do not only the acts to effect that which are specifically enumerated and permitted, but whatsoever they shall think or pretend will be for the general welfare." - Thomas Jefferson (in a letter to William Branch Giles, 1825)

EVERY usurpation of power, EVERY violation of the clear mandate and intention of the Constitution, would appear to be bottomed on some "sophistry" or another, of either the "General Welfare" and/or the "Interstate Commerce Clause" (or, some knaved up "interpretation" of the fictitious presidential 'emergency powers'). What's new?

Yes! It's terrible; yes, it's criminal; yes, I deplore it; yes, yes, YES!!! But the question remains - as stated by Sean Connery's character, in the movie "The Untouchables" -

"What are YOU prepared to do about it?"

As long as the federal branch claims the monopoly power to "interpret" the Constitution - and it DOES! (the states lost any effective input 138 years ago, at Appomattox) - there is little reason to believe this situation can be remedied by yet more appeals (petitions) to our master for 'justice,' is there?

As Thomas Paine once wrote: "...nothing flatters vanity, or confirms obstinacy... more than repeated petitioning." And, a few short months later, the Declaration of Independence echoed this sentiment, when it stated: "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated petition have been answered only by repeated injury."

And so they have! Who can deny it? And can any rational man expect any different results from more of the same? I, for one, certainly do not! [In fact, I am told, that this is the very definition of insanity, i.e. - "Doing the same thing over and over again, while expecting different results"].

All of this repeated alarmist chatter amounts to little more than what a friend of mine has termed "mental masturbation"; that is, it FEELS good, but it produces nothing!

Every Second Amendment/Constitutional advocate worth his salt KNOWS why the Second Amendment was written (and to whom it pertains); it is NOT for duck hunters, or the National Guard but, rather, for freemen, that they might remain free!

But the term "freeman" is much more than a mere word; it is, more importantly, a state of mind. As so many Second Amendment advocates have pointed out, time and again, a gun is just a tool. It is a tool, which freemen can use in their struggle against tyranny. But it is only the MINDSET of a truly freeman that will allow him to use that tool effectively for that purpose.

As Jefferson himself once wrote: "No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." And, indeed, no (truly) "freeman" ever shall! But, I fear, the day is quick approaching, when the American people will be forced to make their election - between liberty and security; between freedom, or perpetual slavery. I only wish I could be more certain, and more optimistic, regarding which path they might choose.

But one thing is certain, those unwilling to use their Second Amendment rights - and their firearms - for their intended purpose, are unworthy to possess them; and will NOT possess them long! Lacking the MINDSET of true freemen, they will forever have to resign themselves to slavery - whether their master ALLOWS them to possess firearms or not. A nation of sheep begets a government of wolves; and, in the final analysis, every nation gets "the government it deserves".

I repeat: "What are YOU prepared to do?" We all know which course the founders chose.

In closing, lest I be dismissed simply as a wild-eyed "terrorist," or worse, let me just add this:

"It is sobering to reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence." - Charles A. Beard

Sincerely,

Claude A. Bohn
Louisville, KY ["If this be treason make the most of it!"]
 
The most effective thing we can do to protect our rights is to elect Libertarians. They are the only ones who know what the Constitution is really about. I believe your statement about the reson behind the Second Amendment is correct. The only way that ordinary citizens and their guns would be effective against the Gov. today would be in a Guerilla war because in open fighting if the military obeyed their order (a BIG if) we would be defeated.
 
What Claude Bohn says! I for one, had a general unrestricted CCW permit until the State of Michigan became a "shall issue" state, the bureaucrats wrote a new law and created a new permit which usurped about half the "rights" I had with my old permit. I have the new permit and followed the law, even tho it stuck in my craw to do so.. But.......I carry my handgun wherever the hell I please to carry it, when I please to carry it despite all of the "conditions" in the law. It is concealed... No one knows I have it...I am skilled in its use, and if I ever have occasion to use it...I may or may not..depending on circumstances, use it in my defense and the defense of my family. That is what I am doing and I sleep the sleep of babes.
grampster
:neener:
 
insufficient public support at this point

remember that even here in America the rule of thirds from the American Revolution applies. 1/3 of the folks were actively supporting the revolutionaries, 1/3 were supporting the tories, and 1/3 were just trying to keep their heads down. Last I looked libertarians are generally 1 to 2 percent of the vote...yeah I know about Wisconsin in '02, I came from there - my relatives report that a bunch of republican folks voted libertarian as a protest vote but with the realization that their primary purpose was to vote for neither the Democrat nor the sleazeball governor. They had no intention of allowing the libertarians to win anything.

that's sort of your problem folks - you cannot win as libertarians, because a significant portion of the conservative vote, myself included, cannot in good conscience vote for you. Therefore, you need to do some coalition building and find another way to get to 1/3 without the socialists figuring out what's going on.

rots of ruck!
 
that's sort of your problem folks - you cannot win as libertarians, because a significant portion of the conservative vote, myself included, cannot in good conscience vote for you.

Why do you think that is? Why do you have problems with the libertarian mindset?

I hear this arguement constantly and I don't really know how to respond. People seem to vote pragmaticlly rather than with their ideals.
 
Faustulus: short answer (though this is really something we should probably do another thread on) because conservative Christians predicate their world view on the fact that there are immutable rules built into the universe. These rules, some of which are known as the 10 Commandments, are the same as gravity and the need of human beings for oxygen. That means that libertarian concepts which act as though those rules were not absolute or arbitrary are not acceptable to us. It does not matter that you may not believe the same things we do. It does not matter that what you propose might be to some extent less onerous than the limitations currently placed upon us. Libertarian systems are still fundamentally flawed and therefore not supportable.

I hope that didn't sound like a flame - I was just trying to be as concise as possible. Did that make it any clearer at all?
 
I certainly didn't take it as a flame. I was just curious.
I agree that libertarians, of which I am one, look at the world as generally lacking in absolutes to an extent.
I am a Christian and there are certain things I take on faith. As a libertarian I realize there are many people who are not Christians and as such do not share the same values as I. I want to give them the right to believe what they want so they will do the same for me.
 
Christianity is far more compatible with libertarianism as opposed to the current R or D platform.

The real issue is fear and trust and human frailty. A lot of people believe in the easy stuff - personal responsibility, the rights of self defense, limited government, etc.

But when it really comes down to it, they have trouble granting freedoms to others that they personally find no use for.

Some Christians have trouble with "allowing" people to do as they wish in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Soccer mommies might be afraid of guns or motorcyclers without helmets.

We talk a lot about the virtues of a libertarian society - liberty, prosperity, etc. But what we forget about is that freedom carries certain risks - you can ride that hog sans brain bucket, but when you wreck, guess what? Your medical insurance may cover you, but there is no welfare or Social Security to fall back on. Maybe you bought long term disability insurance, but since it is not compulsory, some people will not.

They will then lose their job, their house, etc.

Freedom means freedom to fail and completely wreck your life - irretrievably and completely. And there are so many ways to do it.

Some people just have an inate need for security that they prioritize over liberty - that is never going to change.
 
Please, for the love of life, if you are not a libertarian, then don't vote for libertarians. By all means. Just be aware that if you vote for the major parties, you vote against freedom. No amount of equivocation will change that.

Curiously enough, libertarians generally do believe in universal ethical constants, such as the non-aggression principle, unanimous consent, self-ownership, and the like. Just thought I'd point that out.

Justin - Libertarian systems are flawed because they require the existence of a government which is positively prevented from commiting the individual rights violations that a government needs to exist. ;)

- Chris
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top