The lie detector you'll never know is there

[cholla]

I used petition it may have not been the correct legal term I'm not a lawyer.Obviously the analogy  wouldn't occur in the real world.It was to make a point that the Supreme Court is not the final word in the land.

I wouldn't compare Timothy McVey to a patriot but an example of what happens to an individual or small group that takes action on their own.Automatically brands them terrorist not revolutionary.Without getting into any conspiracy theory on this.As for innocents getting killed this happens in all wars from the first one on Earth to the last one if that ever happens.

dukebettrthanunc: The Bill of Rights is reason enough to fight for privacy.Let me give you an example the government has top secret information should the government have a right to keep this private.If two large corperations are planning to merge should I have the right to go in look at any of their files I want to then buy stock.Some refer to this as insider trading.If the government has a right to privacy;if businesses have a right to privacy;then individual citizens should have a right to twice as much.If some innocents get killed because these rights are upheld that is part of the price of freedom.

All citizens of the USA are part of a militia.My proff of this is the Draft although it is not used right now it can be put in place legally at any time & any citizen from just born to 100+ can be drafted if thats the way Congress puts it into effect.

[resopalrabotnick]

the difference between a revolutionary and a terrorist is that a terrorist is a failure and therefore branded a criminal by the regime he tried to harm while a revolutionary is successful or termed a revolutionary by someone that supports his cause.

the draft does not make you part of any milita. you can be turned part of a militia simply because by age you are eligible for military service according to the law.

and can we agree that some of the things in the constitution are seriously dated and need to be looked at? not necessarily to change the whole thing, just to bring things up to date?

[Indestructable]

Big Brother is watching I guess its time to make our aluminum foil hats that should keep them from noticing us.   

To be serious sounds like an invasion of civil rights to be microwaved & lasered without your consent.

shoot man, this is worse than the freakin wire taps! i mean, geez, do i want the stupid government to know about my terrorist status? hell no! 

[tonyswhirl]

You people are messed up. What's the big deal about privacy? If your are HONEST, then you have NOTHING to hide. If you have a secret that you don't want anyone to find out about, chances are that someone needs to find out. Secrecy is what leads to problems. I do think there is a time and a place to keep things confidential, but when you are talking to people with terrorist connections is not one of those times. You're all just selfish. You won't give up your UN-NEEDED privacy, even if it means saving the lives of thousands of other people. There's the age-old question, "What would Jesus do?"

Print this - put in you wallet and take it out 30 years from now - only then will you realize how truly naive you are

[JimPrice]

the difference between a revolutionary and a terrorist is that a terrorist is a failure and therefore branded a criminal by the regime he tried to harm while a revolutionary is successful or termed a revolutionary by someone that supports his cause.

Bingo!  Now we're getting to the meat and potatoes.  Might makes right is not necessarily moral, but it is nevertheless true.

and can we agree that some of the things in the constitution are seriously dated and need to be looked at? not necessarily to change the whole thing, just to bring things up to date?

I don't think so. That is premised on the assumption that we derive our rights FROM the constitution.  If you study your history, you'll find that to be patently false.  The constitution doesn't give us anything.  It simply acknowledged what we already had, as given to us by "our Creator".  While I suppose it could be changed to add acknowledgements of rights we might have overlooked when it was first written, I don't see how existing rights it has already acknowledged can have simply changed or become modified all by themselves.

Maybe I don't get your point.  What do you think has become "dated"?

[dukebettrthanunc]

Print this - put in you wallet and take it out 30 years from now - only then will you realize how truly naive you are

I probably won't have a chance to do that, considering I'll probably be dead in 30 years because the government wasn't allowed to listen to that one phone call where the location, origin, and time of detonation of a nuclear weapon was discussed.

What am I so naive about?

You shouldn't have anything to worry about unless you are talking to terrorists. Calls to terrorists are the only calls that are being monitored.

[tonyswhirl]

I probably won't have a chance to do that, considering I'll probably be dead in 30 years because the government wasn't allowed to listen to that one phone call where the location, origin, and time of detonation of a nuclear weapon was discussed.

What am I so naive about?

You shouldn't have anything to worry about unless you are talking to terrorists. Calls to terrorists are the only calls that are being monitored.

You are naive about how inept they are at doing there jobs - if they decide to pick on you for a valid reason or not your guilt or innocence becomes irrelevant. You will be guilty -

If you believe you are innocent until proven guilty you gotta another think coming!!!!

[resopalrabotnick]

Maybe I don't get your point.

[tonyswhirl]

the right/duty to bear arms for example.

while i don't see a reason for a law abiding citizen to be allowed to own a gun etc. i don't see why one should reason that he should do so because he needs to 'stand ready to defend his country'.

Where I live there is virtually no crime - would you care to guess why - maybe the right to bear arms -

maybe

The occasional burst of an automatic weapon usually keeps idiots away

[resopalrabotnick]

like i said, bearing arms isn't the bad part. the militia part is a little outdated, dontcherthink?

[tonyswhirl]

I am confused - this is what you said

"while i don't see a reason for a law abiding citizen to be allowed to own a gun etc"

[JimPrice]

the right/duty to bear arms for example.

while i don't see a reason for a law abiding citizen to be allowed to own a gun etc. i don't see why one should reason that he should do so because he needs to 'stand ready to defend his country'.

The right to bear arms is the foundation of a free society!  Didn't you stay awake in history???

The founding fathers knew that no government has the capacity to let their citizens stay free forever, no matter how pure the initial start might have been.  Ultimately, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The most important reason for the right to bear arms is because those that came before us knew that weaponry in the hands of citizens would one day be the only means by which they could throw out a tyrannical government.  As a bonus, knowing the citizens are armed gives caution and restraint to the gvernment, thereby slowing down the rate at which they would dare to institute tyranny over the people.

Defending your country does NOT always mean against foreign powers.  Even our own present-day government recognizes this, and when I swore into the USMC, I vowed to protect this land from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

I'm amazed you have formed such strong opinions while seeming to know little aout the subject.

[FallowEarth]

Sounds like you attended propaganda classes. 

The right to bear arms, IMO, is more like the foundation of a feudal society.  I find it sad that so many people think that the only way to truly defend yourself is to stick the barrel of a gun in somebody's face.  I find comfort in the (maybe somewhat lofty) thought that the human race is better than resorting to such primal, instinctive measures to get a point across.  The power is in the numbers, always.  Not the number of guns, but the number of voices, especially with the world as globally conscious as it is today.

And I believe the subject that Resopalrabotnick was referring to is common morality.

[cholla]

resopalrabotnick : The reason I put the part about draft & militia in my earlier post is the antigun people always say"That the militia is who the Second  amendment means has the right to bear arms"Definatly not my interpretation I think this is an individual right.

Here are a few quotes I never can remember which wat this one goes I think both are correct.

"The history of firearms in the history of freedom"

"The history of freedom is the history of firearms"

Before this we were under fuedal law either you were a noble or a serf which is almost a slave. Thats why our ancestors came to America & took it from the British.

"When guns are outlawed only outlaws & the government have guns" both would use this to oppress the people.

FallowEarth; It would be wonderful if the human race had ascended to a level where there would be no need for guns or violence.The problem is most are not there yet by a long way.

When I see all the governments.military & police in all nations lay their guns down & not use them for a long while I will consider doing the same.Let them lead by example.

dukebettrthanunc ; Should I take offense at your user name or am I being overly sensitive?

[JimPrice]

Sounds like you attended propaganda classes.

Nope.  I actually paid attention in history class.  Nice jab, though.  Points for effort.

The right to bear arms, IMO, is more like the foundation of a feudal society

By your admission, that is your humble opinion.  If you knew your history, you could speak with knowledge, not opinions.  Don't get me wrong, I don't slight the importance of personal opinions- they define who we are as individuals.  But your opinion in no way changes historical fact.  And fact, not one man's opinion, is better served across a citizenry.

And I second Cholla's well thought point.  It would be nice to think that Utopia exists, where discussion and debate alone will solve problems, but that's not reality.  The framers of the constitution realized that, thank God; they had some spine, and made provisions to ensure that we would have more recourse than just words.

Let me ask you:  If someone threatened you or your family, would you point out how uncivilized and violent the aggressors were being?  Or would you take some action and protect your family?

[tonyswhirl]

THINK WE DON'T NEED FIREARMS?????

Always remember, our second amendment is NOT about game hunting it is about ensuring that our freedom, our rights, our property, our safety, our lives, and our constitution will always be protected no matter what-even if the law or our courts fail!

GET EDUCATED:

http://www.a-human-right.com/effective.html

Amendment II

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.

"The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age..." -- Title 10, Section 311 of the U.S. Code.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."

George Mason

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is...to protect themselves against tyranny in Government."

-- Thomas Jefferson

"The weak, and those unwilling to make the struggle, soon resign their liberties and freedoms for the protection of powerful men or paid armies; they begin by being protected, they end up being subjugated."

-- Louis L

[FallowEarth]

The right to bear arms, IMO, is more like the foundation of a feudal society

By your admission, that is your humble opinion.

[tonyswhirl]

Divide the country into two parts

1 part -  no guns

1 part - everyone armed

within in two weeks (at the outside) the part with no guns will be on their hand and knees begging to enter the armed part.

[FallowEarth]

Divide the country into two parts

1 part -

[cholla]

Heres a few quotes I will throw in:

Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

-- George Washington

Rhetoric is a poor substitute for action. -- Theodore Roosevelt

I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those

in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. -- James Madison

No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant in its preservation. -- General Douglas MacArthur

Our country is being radically altered, step by step, by Justices who are not following any law. -- Robert Bork

That book [the Bible], sir, is the rock on which our Republic rests. When that book falls, I assure you that the liberties you

enjoy will go with it. -- Andrew Jackson

[tonyswhirl]

Do you think that's a logical resolution?  Give the guns to only half the people?

You misuderstood my post - or it was not clear.

Let the people who do not want guns have their half of the country

Let the people who want guns have the other half

you have your choice where you want to be, but can never switch

I say within in two weeks the nongun half would be begging to get into the gun half

[JimPrice]

So where are your facts?

C'mon FallowEarth.  They're not "my" facts, they're our facts- our National History.  Don't be lazy and challenge me to be your private tutor- research your nation's history for yourself.  If this thread hasn't stirred your curiosity yet, then chances are nothing will.

I think this quote is appropo: "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home in peace, we seek not your coucil nor your arms. Kneel down and lick the hand that feeds you, may your chains weigh lightly upon you, and may posterity forget we were ever countrymen." -Samuel Adams

In other words, if you don't care enough to educate yourself about it, and do your part to mantain it, you've already lost it.  But don't take my word for it- look for yourself.

[richcornucopia]

Lol

Name:  FallowEarth

Posts:  1287 (5.067 per day)

Position:  Make it Faster... Moderator

Date Registered:  May 02, 2005, 12:28:10 PM

Last Active:  Today at 08:20:18 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ICQ: 

AIM: 

MSN: 

YIM: 

Email:  hidden 

Website: 

Current Status:  Online  [Add To Buddy List] 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gender:  Male

Age: 22

Location: Ontario, Canada

Local Time: January 11, 2006, 08:30:51 PM

[FallowEarth]

You misuderstood my post - or it was not clear.

Let the people who do not want guns have their half of the country

Let the people who want guns have the other half

you have your choice where you want to be, but can never switch

I say within in two weeks the nongun half would be begging to get into the gun half

Well if that's the case, I would say that the gun side would wipe about 75% of the population out initially, put some high fences up around their property, with some turrets and shit, rig the place up with landmines and sit back.

richcornucopia, yep that's me.

[resopalrabotnick]

christ! i'm just a troll, don't take everything i say so literally. of course i meant don't see a reason for law abiding citizens not to bear arms.

:haha:

ow, my frickin head. it's wasted.....