What Would Happen if NJ, NY, IL, etc. Suddenly Recognized the Constitution?

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

E36M3

Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
162
Location
Pennsylvania
Just thought that this would make for a good discussion. Would the people be unable to handle it for some reason, as some suggest, or would people become empowered to embrace accountability, personal responsibility and self reliance in other areas as well? Like, for example, would honoring the rights of citizens in currently repressed states put a crimp on corrupt politics? Would politicians be encouraged to conduct themselves with greater accountability to actual leadership? Wonder if it's a coincidence that these areas seem to have more corruption than other states.
 
Last edited:
The only connection I can make with corruption is that the big city politicians in those States would have a nervous breakdown and have to be replaced.;)
 
Two things would happen:


1. The crime rate would drop, just like anywhere else where gun restrictions are lifted.

2. Some folks that would otherwise be fleeing to free states would stay.
 
It has been suggested that the crime rate in Indiana dropped because the criminals were able to move across the border to Illinois to find work. If the pols in Illinois were to suddenly remember (on their own or with the help of the ballot box) that there is a 2nd A, the BG's might have to look northward to Canada.
 
Are you kidding? It would be similar to the horrors that ensued with the AWB sunset. AK-47’s and UZI’s would flood the streets and be sold to kids right from ice cream trucks. Schoolyards would be like shooting galleries for people spray-firing from the hip at 600 rounds a minute, just because they can. Terrorists would walk right into Wal-Mart and buy the same guns that our GI’s are looking down the barrel of in Iraq. It would be utterly horrendous.

But seriously I think that very little would change, at least in the short-term.

Gameface
 
First of all, just to clarify something, Illinois has far from the worst gun laws in the nation. Yes we have the FOID card and yes we have Chicago, but there are many states with more restrictions on gun ownership then Illinois.

No one says that Missouri is antigun, yet you have to get a pemit from the Sheriff to buy a handgun there. You all need to stop painting the entire state with the Daley brush......

Secondly, I think it's a fallacy that restrictive gun laws create corrupt government. I think the opposite is true. Corrupt governments tend to create restrictive gun laws as a way of disarming their political opponents. The corruption was there before the gun laws.

The only way that cesspools like Illinois, NJ, New York will get cleaned up is by vigorous prosecution of all corruption from the lowest public offical to the top. This prosecution will have to be thorough enough to convince the people who live there that corruption is not the way government business is conducted. This will probably take a couple generations in places like Illinois and New Jersey, because the people who replace the corrupt politicos that were just locked up will inherit the same corrupt system with all of it's temptations. Here in Illinois the Republicans were turned out of state office in massive numbers after almost a 30 year run of control. Instead of instituting any reforms, the Democrats have simply taken over the system to run it for their benefit. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss......

Relaxing of onerous gun laws will probably drive the crime rate down as private citizens are empowered to legally defend themselves...but it will have no effect on the rest of the corruption.

Jeff
 
Corrupt governments tend to create restrictive gun laws as a way of disarming their political opponents.
Click to expand...

Yep. Corruption invariably leads to more corruption, which leads to more corruption, which leads to... Sooner or later—usually sooner—the corrupt invariably infringe commoners' civil rights.
 
The corruption and the anti mindset in these places have the same common root, lack of personal accountability. If I'm not accountable for what I do, then neither is my elected official. If my elected official isn't accountable, then it must be someone else's fault if he's taking bribes. If my elected offical is in danger of being caught with his hand in the cookie jar he just comes out of the closet, claims it's all a conspiracy against him because of his orientation, resigns, and gets a job with one of his fellow politicians (guess what state I live in!).

Of course if I'm not accountable for my actions I have to find someone who is accountable for my actions, and that person over there is claiming to be accountable for his actions so he must be accountable for mine too. Therefore we have to take his guns away from him, we have to tax him and give the money to me.
 
Just thought that this would make for a good discussion. Would the people be unable to handle it for some reason, as some suggest, or would people become empowered to embrace accountability, personal responsibility and self reliance in other areas as well? Like, for example, would honoring the rights of citizens in currently repressed states put a crimp on corrupt politics? Would politicians be encouraged to conduct themselves with greater accountability to actual leadership? Wonder if it's a coincidence that these areas seem to have more corruption than other states.
Click to expand...
You make it sound like we have no rights here, which is totally wrong.
We have no more corruption than any other part of the country.
 
hellfrozenover.jpg
 
Considering that the population was able to handle legal abortion, I imagine after a year or so they would adjust.
Then we just have to get the government to recognize other right. They could stop infringing in action and legislation on individual privacy and search & seizure laws. They could stop attempting passage of Constitutional Amendments against gay marriage. Abuse of emminent domain laws (sp?) might be ended.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top