Food For Thought
A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take every thing you have. Thomas Jefferson
Owning a gun is a privilege...they can be taken away.
All gun owners from one state to another should work and stand together.
Owning a gun is a privilege...they can be taken away.
All gun owners from one state to another should work and stand together.
0
-
Obviously the two decenters here in this thread have NO EARTHLY IDEA of what our beloved Constitution's Second Amendment says.
May I suggest to Old 7x57 and RTKBA: Pick up a copy of this document and READ IT!! There you will find YOUR RIGHT to keep and bear arms. It is NOT a privilege, it is a RIGHT. If you allow it to be your privilege, then your right will fade away like a migrating monarch. Get with the program and learn your rights so you can help protect them from becoming a memory.
I'm really tired of dealing with ignorant-turned stupid people who fail to understand basic principles. Its just MADDENING!!![:(!][:(!][:(!]
[:)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by RogueStatesman
Obviously the two decenters here in this thread have NO EARTHLY IDEA of what our beloved Constitution's Second Amendment says.
May I suggest to Old 7x57 and RTKBA: Pick up a copy of this document and READ IT!! There you will find YOUR RIGHT to keep and bear arms. It is NOT a privilege, it is a RIGHT. If you allow it to be your privilege, then your right will fade away like a migrating monarch. Get with the program and learn your rights so you can help protect them from becoming a memory.
I'm really tired of dealing with ignorant-turned stupid people who fail to understand basic principles. Its just MADDENING!!![:(!][:(!][:(!]
[:)]
Actually I have studied the constitution for years RugueStatesmen. The point I was making is that in today's world it is treated as a privilege by our Government. And unless you plan on spending a lot of time in prison you yourself will have to treat it as a privilege.
And if you insist it is still a right today, than perhaps you can point me in the right direction to get an MP7-A1 or maybe an MG4. How many unregistered machine guns do you own?
lt496 got right to the hart of the issue with
"A right not exercised...
It is only a privilege if one personally allows it to be so, regardless of what the anti-constitutional government's commonly-accepted 'infringement' is."
The Government has made it impossible to exercise your right with out spending most of your life behind bars. So yes, read the constitution and than take a long look around you and you will realize that most of our cherished rights have been lost for a very long time.0 -
If you have been studying it for years, then you're not entirely believing what you studied.
I believe I understand what you're saying. But its a foolish mind and a soft heart that considers the 2nd a privilege in ANY ASPECT. I follow the gun laws even though they're unconstitutional; that keeps me out of jail. HOWEVER, you will never convince me in any form that this right is any kind of privilege. Possessing a 'driver's license' is a privilege but keeping and bearing arms is a Right.
You're getting into legalities outside the amendment itself and that's where you're wrong. Just because you can't legally own a mp5 select fire doesn't mean your privilege is infringed, it means your right has been violated. Follow me? Just because an item is not 'legal' to own, doesn't mean you don't have a right to have it.
The Fed has watered down our rights like you said "for a very long time", but they are still rights under the Constitution. And until that document is suspended and some far more restrictive government is imposed or the SCOTUS says that right is unconstitutional, its still a right, not a privilege.
So I still accurately and correctly maintain that a Constitutional Right is a "RIGHT" and not a privilege. You can choose otherwise at your own 'privilege'.[;)]
[:)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by RogueStatesman
If you have been studying it for years, then you're not entirely believing what you studied.
I believe I understand what you're saying. But its a foolish mind and a soft heart that considers the 2nd a privilege in ANY ASPECT. I follow the gun laws even though they're unconstitutional; that keeps me out of jail. HOWEVER, you will never convince me in any form that this right is any kind of privilege. Possessing a 'driver's license' is a privilege but keeping and bearing arms is a Right.
You're getting into legalities outside the amendment itself and that's where you're wrong. Just because you can't legally own a mp5 select fire doesn't mean your privilege is infringed, it means your right has been violated. Follow me? Just because an item is not 'legal' to own, doesn't mean you don't have a right to have it.
The Fed has watered down our rights like you said "for a very long time", but they are still rights under the Constitution. And until that document is suspended and some far more restrictive government is imposed or the SCOTUS says that right is unconstitutional, its still a right, not a privilege.
So I still accurately and correctly maintain that a Constitutional Right is a "RIGHT" and not a privilege. You can choose otherwise at your own 'privilege'.[;)]
[:)]
LOL...
I think we are very close to the same page but not quite there.
First I think we can all agree that the Bill Of Rights are unalienable rights. Rights granted by a higher power (or what ever you would like to call it) that are necessary for any free man to consider himself free.
Now take a look around you, how many laws, ordinances and regulations have been written to circumvent, go around and outright strip you of these rights. And now I will ask you, How can you call something a right if when you exercise it you become a criminal?
My point is this, you can scream IT'S MY RIGHT all you want while they drag you off to jail. Or people can start to wake up and realize that the Rights they hold so dear are now a mere privilege. Then just maybe enough people will come together and steer this unconstitutional government back on the correct path. Where good people can exercise a right without becoming a criminal.
And for the record, I can debate the drivers license being a privilege. Another time.[:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by RTKBA
quote:Originally posted by RogueStatesman
If you have been studying it for years, then you're not entirely believing what you studied.
I believe I understand what you're saying. But its a foolish mind and a soft heart that considers the 2nd a privilege in ANY ASPECT. I follow the gun laws even though they're unconstitutional; that keeps me out of jail. HOWEVER, you will never convince me in any form that this right is any kind of privilege. Possessing a 'driver's license' is a privilege but keeping and bearing arms is a Right.
You're getting into legalities outside the amendment itself and that's where you're wrong. Just because you can't legally own a mp5 select fire doesn't mean your privilege is infringed, it means your right has been violated. Follow me? Just because an item is not 'legal' to own, doesn't mean you don't have a right to have it.
The Fed has watered down our rights like you said "for a very long time", but they are still rights under the Constitution. And until that document is suspended and some far more restrictive government is imposed or the SCOTUS says that right is unconstitutional, its still a right, not a privilege.
So I still accurately and correctly maintain that a Constitutional Right is a "RIGHT" and not a privilege. You can choose otherwise at your own 'privilege'.[;)]
[:)]
LOL...
I think we are very close to the same page but not quite there.
First I think we can all agree that the Bill Of Rights are unalienable rights. Rights granted by a higher power (or what ever you would like to call it) that are necessary for any free man to consider himself free.
Now take a look around you, how many laws, ordinances and regulations have been written to circumvent, go around and outright strip you of these rights. And now I will ask you, How can you call something a right if when you exercise it you become a criminal?
My point is this, you can scream IT'S MY RIGHT all you want while they drag you off to jail. Or people can start to wake up and realize that the Rights they hold so dear are now a mere privilege. Then just maybe enough people will come together and steer this unconstitutional government back on the correct path. Where good people can exercise a right without becoming a criminal.
And for the record, I can debate the drivers license being a privilege. Another time.[:D]
You mean your freedom to travel? And your freedom to choose the means of travel? And we can liken the "travel" to blackpowder firearms and say an AR in the rights arena? [;)]0 -
"You mean your freedom to travel? And your freedom to choose the means of travel? And we can liken the "travel" to blackpowder firearms and say an AR in the rights arena?"
I think you lost me on this Freemind.
The right to travel, although not enumerated in the Bill Of Rights is certainly implied in the constitution. And are you aware of the history concerning the drivers license? How it came to be and why it was implemented?
Turning any right, from the 2A to the ability of someone to go to the store to feed there family into a privilege is not okay in my book.
Just saying.[;)]0 -
I understand as per the constitution we have the right to gun ownership. As RTKBA stated we are slowly losing constitutional rights all the time. One example would be the right to pray in our schools...that's gone. The point I was making is that our gun ownership right can be taken away...we as gun owners need to take a stand and work together and not let this happen. What I got from the responses to my statement, was a negative Macho attitude...a lot of the responses took me back to the eighth grade. It was a relief to read RTKBA's comments...he put the Macho attitude to the side and told it how it really is. 0 -
There ... fixed it for you. That's the proper terminology and any BORs or COTUS student would have known the difference.
As a sidenote: The definition of "inalienable" refers to rights rights that cannot be surrendered, sold, transfered to another or capable of being repudiated. Even though its suggested, it doesn't however, directly reflect that those rights are granted by a "higher power".
My correct points concerning right vs. privilege stands. Please refer to any true Constitutionalist who actually believes the document in its entirety and you will discover that the COTUS and BOR are rights, even when specific laws violate those documents.
And the driver's license debate ... its waiting for you.[;)][;)]
[:)]
quote:Originally posted by RTKBA
quote:Originally posted by RogueStatesman
If you have been studying it for years, then you're not entirely believing what you studied.
I believe I understand what you're saying. But its a foolish mind and a soft heart that considers the 2nd a privilege in ANY ASPECT. I follow the gun laws even though they're unconstitutional; that keeps me out of jail. HOWEVER, you will never convince me in any form that this right is any kind of privilege. Possessing a 'driver's license' is a privilege but keeping and bearing arms is a Right.
You're getting into legalities outside the amendment itself and that's where you're wrong. Just because you can't legally own a mp5 select fire doesn't mean your privilege is infringed, it means your right has been violated. Follow me? Just because an item is not 'legal' to own, doesn't mean you don't have a right to have it.
The Fed has watered down our rights like you said "for a very long time", but they are still rights under the Constitution. And until that document is suspended and some far more restrictive government is imposed or the SCOTUS says that right is unconstitutional, its still a right, not a privilege.
So I still accurately and correctly maintain that a Constitutional Right is a "RIGHT" and not a privilege. You can choose otherwise at your own 'privilege'.[;)]
[:)]
LOL...
I think we are very close to the same page but not quite there.
First I think we can all agree that the Bill Of Rights are unalienable inalienable rights. Rights granted by a higher power (or what ever you would like to call it) that are necessary for any free man to consider himself free.
Now take a look around you, how many laws, ordinances and regulations have been written to circumvent, go around and outright strip you of these rights. And now I will ask you, How can you call something a right if when you exercise it you become a criminal?
My point is this, you can scream IT'S MY RIGHT all you want while they drag you off to jail. Or people can start to wake up and realize that the Rights they hold so dear are now a mere privilege. Then just maybe enough people will come together and steer this unconstitutional government back on the correct path. Where good people can exercise a right without becoming a criminal.
And for the record, I can debate the drivers license being a privilege. Another time.[:D]0 -
Yes, it can be taken away. But until then, its a right and not a privilege, even if a law waters it down or whitles it somehow.
Our inalienable rights are written in black and white and its our stupidity as a human race to have allowed those who wish control over us to take those rights. I agree with you too, a stand must be made against those who will take our rights.
One problem with your post is that you didn't provide a solution to the problem. How do we stand together when certain gun 'rights' organizations are not standing for us after being entrusted with this task? What work would you suggest that could be accomplished to ensure our rights to keep and bear arms is not infringed? Any suggestions??
[:)]
quote:Originally posted by Old 7x57
I understand as per the constitution we have the right to gun ownership. As RTKBA stated we are slowly losing constitutional rights all the time. One example would be the right to pray in our schools...that's gone. The point I was making is that our gun ownership right can be taken away...we as gun owners need to take a stand and work together and not let this happen. What I got from the responses to my statement, was a negative Macho attitude...a lot of the responses took me back to the eighth grade. It was a relief to read RTKBA's comments...he put the Macho attitude to the side and told it how it really is.0 -
quote:As a sidenote: The definition of "inalienable" refers to rights rights that cannot be surrendered, sold, transfered to another or capable of being repudiated. Even though its suggested, it doesn't however, directly reflect that those rights are granted by a "higher power". quote:Our inalienable rights are written in black and white and its our stupidity as a human race to have allowed those who wish control over us to take those rights. I agree with you too, a stand must be made against those who will take our rights.
Not so fast...
An individual's rights are 'unalienable' and that is exactly the word that is used in our founding documents, for a reason.
'Inalienable' was originally used by the founders in a draft of the Declaration, but it was deliberately changed to 'unalienable'.
The difference...
"Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred."
-Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, pg. 1523-
"You cannot surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual and cannot under any circumstances be surrendered or taken. All individual's have unalienable rights"
"Inalienable rights: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights."
-Morrison v. State, Mo. App. 252 S.W. 2d 97, 101-
"You can surrender, sell or transfer inalienable rights if you consent either actually or constructively. Inalienable rights are not inherent in man and can be alienated by government. Persons have inalienable rights. Most state constitutions recognize only inalienable rights."0 -
quote:"inalienable" refers to rights rights that cannot be surrendered, sold, transfered to another or capable of being repudiated. Even though its suggested, it doesn't however, directly reflect that those rights are granted by a "higher power".Really?
"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." Declaration of Independence, 2nd para.0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496
quote:"inalienable" refers to rights rights that cannot be surrendered, sold, transfered to another or capable of being repudiated. Even though its suggested, it doesn't however, directly reflect that those rights are granted by a "higher power".Really?
"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." Declaration of Independence, 2nd para.
yup. Why we allow these rights to continue to be treated as a privilege is beyond me.0 -
lt, thank you for the clarification on "Unalienable" and "Inalienable"; I stand corrected.
But please let me point out that the phrase ""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," is not found in either the BOR or the COTUS; its found in the Declaration of Independence.
Even though the Declaration of Independence is a powerful document, it does not offer any governing powers thereto.
Among other purposes, the Declaration of Independence marked the official separation between the 13 colonies and Great Britain and officially declared war against Great Britain, even though the first shots of the war took place nearly a year earlier.
In the words of Thomas Paine, the DOI served us as "an expression of the American mind."
The COTUS and the BOR are this nation's standing documents which created the primary (Federal) government of the United States and certain procedures of said government. The BOR explains the basic rights of all American citizens.
You are correct: God's purpose for every man to have certain rights is cited, but not in the COTUS or the BOR, which was what was assumed earlier.
[:)]0 -
quote:Even though the Declaration of Independence is a powerful document, it does not offer any governing powers thereto.The Declaration of Independence has been adopted into the United States Code. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by RogueStatesman
lt, thank you for the clarification on "Unalienable" and "Inalienable"; I stand corrected.
But please let me point out that the phrase ""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," is not found in either the BOR or the COTUS; its found in the Declaration of Independence.
Even though the Declaration of Independence is a powerful document, it does not offer any governing powers thereto.
Among other purposes, the Declaration of Independence marked the official separation between the 13 colonies and Great Britain and officially declared war against Great Britain, even though the first shots of the war took place nearly a year earlier.
In the words of Thomas Paine, the DOI served us as "an expression of the American mind."
The COTUS and the BOR are this nation's standing documents which created the primary (Federal) government of the United States and certain procedures of said government. The BOR explains the basic rights of all American citizens.
You are correct: God's purpose for every man to have certain rights is cited, but not in the COTUS or the BOR, which was what was assumed earlier.
[:)]
Okay RogueStatesmen.
I personally just like a good debate, to get people to think of things a little different, to open up minds a little that's all.
I do have one question for you though,
Do you believe the first 10 amendments to the Bill Of Rights are inalienable rights?0 -
Are you done 'schooling' me yet, rogue?
I am learning a lot about our founding from you. I particularly enjoy the wise definitive lecture method that you have been using.[:)]0 -
Ok, I didn't expect the smart-ass remarks, but ok ... whatever.
[:)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by RogueStatesman
Ok, I didn't expect the smart-ass remarks, but ok ... whatever.
[:)]
Sometimes you gotta let off a bit o' pressure. Today was that day.
No offense rogue.[:)]0 -
Lemme just say sumthin. according to natural law, Gods law he is mistaken. According to the laws of the land his is correct. they fact they are not legitmate is neither here nor there.
You get caught with a concealed pistol without the Permit (phisical form that conveys permission), you will be arrested or killed.
If you have a gun with a barrel to short without the permit, you get arrested or killed.
You got a gun thats shot to many times per trigger pull according to uncle sugar thats grounds for imprisonment or death.
You can have it, yes, but they will kill you if they catch you, if you dont submit.. And submitting is what people do to get permission. In this case its permission to go to prison, and have everything you have stolen instead of being murdered.
Thats the sum of things when observed through the lense of objective natural law. By which I mean That is the self evident facts, that every man has to come to if he is sane and completely honest with himself.
You folks give this man far to much BS, and it is unwarranted and un earned.
I will never allow myself to be murdered for owning a thing. therefor I submit, and by that act of submission I retain my privilege to live, and own my stuff.
The fact that you have to submit or die for anything other then mundane needs in a free country is absurd.
The words submit or die and the words free country are mutually exclusive. If you have to submit or die, you are not free.
again that is the truth of things through the lense of nautral law, The self evident Obvious facts.
I dont factor murderers and such into my thinking.. I am talking about the normal people. The ones who respect freedom.0 -
Owning a gun is a right that the government was never granted the authority to restrict or regulate in ANY way. 0 -
I'm just kinda reflecting on the comparison that Old 7x57 made to a thief stealing a person's weapons and the government doing the same thing.
There is something poetic in that thought.
[:p]0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
51 comments