Home

Well,...he's simply stating that a constitution isn't sufficient to keep the state from assuming power.

Once power is centralized, the state will define *any* constitution in a manner which benefits the state.

,..which is exactly what the U.S. government has done.

Once Lincoln declared that a state which voluntarily joined the union couldn't voluntarily *leave* the union, the constitution was a dead letter.

It ceased to exist in any meaningful way after the Civil War.

Reid didn't tell me what to believe.

So can you list the fatalities and injuries that resulted from that violence? I would say they used minimal force. They used so little force that they backed way completely. Bundy's son who got tased? He was defying lawful orders and had driven his ATV into a government vehicle.

They allowed at least one "protester" to point a rifle at them without killing him. That seems pretty patient to me.

Just as a reminder, appropriate force is allowed in support of the law, force is not allowed in resisting the law.

I have to ask...why is it that all of a sudden when we've had a few hot and long threads here over the past month or so, that we've got all these "members" showing up with Registration Dates going way back to '03 or '04 or so. They've only got a few hundred posts though, at most, and nobody's ever heard of them? They're also all on the side of big government. Anybody else think that's strange?

Yes.Predictable.Expect a personal visit.

How about the BLM snipers pointing guns at the protesters?
So is that ok?
I sure hope your attitude is the minority, otherwise we are destined to be ruled by the tyrannical regime of the day.

You are a perfect example of whats causing the encroachment on our liberties.
Go ahead and submit yourself to being ruled over, just dont try and take us with you.
Useful idiot!!

Perhaps you could enlighten us to where there is a law that allows ANYONE to use threats of deadly force (pointing guns) while effecting a CIVIL judgment?

Is your ex-wife allowed to pull a gun on you to pay child support? Or create "First Amendment Zones" 3 miles form where anyone can hear you if your opinion differs from hers?

Just as a reminder, "the force necessary to effect an arrest" is allowed in criminal violations and cases.

The only criminal violations anyone saw in those tense days at Gold Butte were those committed by the government.

Got proof of that?

I saw him tased three times when he never even balled a fist, and his feet were squarely on the ground. (As the agent threw his aunt to the ground, and set the K-9 units on them.)

Put the women and children at the front lines, and if the Feds want to open fire the media can show them killing them first!

Pretty much the plan of the fanatical ex-sheriff from Arizona that came to lend his support....

Hide behind the women and children!


Phil

Apparently somebody said this to me awhile back and I didn't see it. I'd like to point out that I haven't advocated any illegal acts. I'd like to further point out as Rockinbar is saying, illegal acts are not limited to non-government personnel. It has also been pointed out several times that once the Nazi Party came to power, the Nazi's always acted under color of law and the Jews and other "undesirables" were always in violation of the law. As a consequence, the Jewish people were nearly exterminated.

Another communist big .gov supporter weighs in.

Of course, it's to be expected especially on this Forum.

It's a conspiracy! Government spies! We infiltrated years ago so we could be in place when the Bundy showdown happened.

Is that more likely than that we are fellow hunters and gun owners who disagree with some of you? Or is it not allowed to dissent with the dissenters?

I'm not pro Big Government, I'm anti law-by-militia.

So you are saying that you are a Tory.Your choice.

There are a number of people on the Fire and they shall remain nameless but we all know who they are, would have made very good Nazis. "I was just following orders."

If the Constitution is going to have any validity as the supreme law of the land than force has to back it up. Hence, the reason for the 2nd Amendment. The present regime of King Barrack I is a lawless regime and the Constitution gives the people the right to use necessary force to enforce the Constitution on the regime if necessary much like the Magna Carta was forced on King John in 1215 by his barons.

We are at a serious crossroads in this country as to what direction we are going to go, is the Constitution going to be the supreme law of the land or merely a historical parchment document.

Oh you are a big government liberal alright and a agent provocateur.

One of the rules of liberals is too deny they are liberal and claim they are reasonable.
They are sneaky scoundrels!

Brilliant.

It's not the conservatives you have to worry about being violent and using weapons.

The liberals are the ones to fear.
Liberals will use guns to take your liberties away.

Conservative value weapons as a means of defense.

Yes, I've noticed it as well. Very strange.

More like what Bristoe terms a "Knothead".