Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
DarkKnightNomeD

In these historic times, it is important that we stand with freedom.

7 posts in this topic

In these historic times, it is important that we stand with freedom. Against the fears, propaganda, and tyrannical actions of the few. Directed at we the people!
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
"Whereas civil-rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
-- Tench Coxe, in Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.
-- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ... "
-- Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)
"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
--James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46
"To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws."
--John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."
--Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
--Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
"Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it."
--Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356
"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]
"The right of the people to keep and bear ... arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country ..."
-- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789
"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty .... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."
-- Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment, I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789
" ... to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
-- George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380
" ... but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights ..."
-- Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29
"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
-- Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836
"The great object is, that every man be armed ... Every one who is able may have a gun."
-- Patrick Henry, Elliot, p.3:386
"O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone ..."
-- Patrick Henry, Elliot p. 3:50-53, in Virginia Ratifying Convention demanding a guarantee of the right to bear arms
"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them."
-- Zachariah Johnson, delegate to Virginia Ratifying Convention, Elliot, 3:645-6
"Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms ... The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible."
-- Hubert H. Humphrey, Senator, Vice President, 22 October 1959
"The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpation of power by rulers. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally ... enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
-- Joseph Story, Supreme Court Justice, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, p. 3:746-7, 1833
" ... most attractive to Americans, the possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave, it being the ultimate means by which freedom was to be preserved."
-- James Burgh, 18th century English Libertarian writer, Shalhope, The Ideological Origins of the Second Amendment, p.604
"The right [to bear arms] is general. It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the laws, are liable to the performance of military duty, and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon.... f the right were limited to those enrolled, the purpose of the guarantee might be defeated altogether by the action or the neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check. The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose. But this enables the government to have a well regulated militia; for to bear arms implies something more than mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them in a way that makes those who keep them ready for their efficient use; in other words, it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms, observing in so doing the laws of public order."

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a strong advocate of Freedom, but most people are not. They say they are until you point our Freedom accepts no rules whatsoever...then they get a little uncomfortable.

 

Every Law is an attack on freedom. If you support binding Laws of any sort you are an enemy of freedom. Restrictions of any sort are an attack on freedom.

 

Just because there are no laws or rules doesn't mean chaos or anarchy. Human beings are co-operative by nature. People are more inclined to help others that not in most nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/12/2015 at 3:50 AM, Guitar Doc said:

I am a strong advocate of Freedom, but most people are not. They say they are until you point our Freedom accepts no rules whatsoever...then they get a little uncomfortable.

 

Every Law is an attack on freedom. If you support binding Laws of any sort you are an enemy of freedom. Restrictions of any sort are an attack on freedom.

 

Just because there are no laws or rules doesn't mean chaos or anarchy. Human beings are co-operative by nature. People are more inclined to help others that not in most nations.

I'd be interested in your opinion of a piece I wrote about government: *Link Removed*

The problem I see with no rules at all is that humans have a history of needing them, because there's always someone who has no respect for other people and their property. People can't be free if they have to constantly be on guard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/12/2015 at 3:52 AM, Challenger said:

I'd be interested in a piece I wrote about government: *Link Removed*

The problem I see with no rules at all is that humans have a history of needing them, because there's always someone who has no respect for other people and their property. People can't be free if they have to constantly be on guard.

But we do have to be constantly on guard. If you are not when you are driving you crash. If you are not when you are walking you could trip or fall. When using a sharp knife in food preparation you could cut yourself if you are not on guard.

 

People have been conditioning into "needing rules" and they simply can't imagine not having rules because they were raised with rules. I come from one of the most lawless places in NZ. We didn't have gangs in my home town because local people would put a gun to their heads escort them over the Buller Bridge and tell them not to bother coming back. That went on until they provided more than two cops in the district. Once lots of cops were there we couldn't keep our community clean. It was against their rules.

 

If you are raised by head-hunters that is normal to you.

If you are raised by racists that is normal to you.

If you are raised in societies where laws are enforced at gun point that is normal to you.

 

If you have been raised in societies with Laws and rules the thought of not having them has been made to sound terrifying to you so you will keep in your place and those who make the rules stay in charge.

 

Oh god the scariness of not having rules or laws, people might do things. Well in societies where people have strong laws those terrible things still happen laws or no laws.

Laws and rules don't protect anyone, they never have done. All the do is make people accountable if you ever find the people who broke them. Rules don't protect you, you protect you.

There is nothing keeping you safe right now, never has been. If someone wants to break into your house and they are determined enough nothing will stop them...except you and your good neighbours.

The police don't protect us, just ask any murder victim if the law or the police protected them and kept them alive.

 

The problem with rules is where do you stop?

My grandparents were told after WWII no Western government would ever regulate human beings ever again, because that was what the Nazi's were all about. Law was only suppose to regulate commerce not people. The Nazis were going to make a rule for every facet of human life. That is what happens when you are invested in rules, they never stop until you have made a rule for absolutely everything. Every law made to regulate human being since then is pissing on the graves of millions of young men who died so you could have Freedom, that is what they were told they were fighting for.

If you start making rules you will never stop. It will go on until everything possible has a rule.

 

The other alternative is Freedom.

The Price of Freedom is "people will make mistakes" and if you accept Freedom then you have to accept people will make mistakes. The best lessons we learn are from making mistakes, take away those chances to make mistakes and you take away the opportunity to learn and expand on what human beings and humanity is.

 

You shouldn't drive recklessly, everyone knows that. But in my home town generations of young men have done just that...until one of their number died doing so, then the rest settle down and drive safely. Sometimes it takes someone to die for everyone else to self correct their dangerous behaviour and nothing will sway them until that death occurs. Mistakes teach peoples better than laws or rules.

 

Yup accidents and mistakes will happen, but that is freedom. Take that away and you might as well have let the Nazis win.

 

Like I said, I am a strong advocate of Freedom, but most people are rule junkies when it comes down to it. Scared of possibilities than in most cases will never happen. Taught to be fearful and afraid and taught the Law will protect them from the scary things. Conditioning, pure and simple.

Who has what it takes to break their social indoctrination?

Very few I would suggest have the quality and strength of character to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Guitar Doc said:

But we do have to be constantly on guard. If you are not when you are driving you crash. If you are not when you are walking you could trip or fall. When using a sharp knife in food preparation you could cut yourself if you are not on guard.

What I meant was guarding your family and property, not individual diligence. Protection from robbers and killers.

1 minute ago, Guitar Doc said:

People have been conditioning into "needing rules" and they simply can't imagine not having rules because they were raised with rules. I come from one of the most lawless places in NZ. We didn't have gangs in my home town because local people would put a gun to their heads escort them over the Buller Bridge and tell them not to bother coming back. That went on until they provided more than two cops in the district. Once lots of cops were there we couldn't keep our community clean. It was against their rules.

Rules are for people who don't discipline themselves to respect other people and their property. Being raised without learning that kind of respect is why rules are needed. And you can't guarantee that everyone will be raised well, so you can't assume nobody would violate your person or property.

1 minute ago, Guitar Doc said:

The problem with rules is where do you stop?...

If you start making rules you will never stop. It will go on until everything possible has a rule.

Like I said, I am a strong advocate of Freedom, but most people are rule junkies when it comes down to it. Scared of possibilities than in most cases will never happen. Taught to be fearful and afraid and taught the Law will protect them from the scary things. Conditioning, pure and simple.

Who has what it takes to break their social indoctrination?

Very few I would suggest have the quality and strength of character to do so.

I don't accept the logic that if there are any rules then it means we're Nazis. And I did try to explain in my blog post I linked to about figuring out where to draw the lines. It isn't about fear, it's about not being naive. There will always be people who don't respect you or your stuff, and people who think that they have the right to kill you if you accidentally walk on their grass. I couldn't stand idly by if that happened to my neighbor, just because "there are no rules". And such things can escalate quickly until you wind up with a "Hatfields and McCoys" feud that goes on for generations and nobody remembers why it started. Is that "fear"? No, it's history and human nature. Like it or not, without rules you will indeed have anarchy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Challenger said:

What I meant was guarding your family and property, not individual diligence. Protection from robbers and killers.

Rules are for people who don't discipline themselves to respect other people and their property. Being raised without learning that kind of respect is why rules are needed. And you can't guarantee that everyone will be raised well, so you can't assume nobody would violate your person or property.

I don't accept the logic that if there are any rules then it means we're Nazis. And I did try to explain in my blog post I linked to about figuring out where to draw the lines. It isn't about fear, it's about not being naive. There will always be people who don't respect you or your stuff, and people who think that they have the right to kill you if you accidentally walk on their grass. I couldn't stand idly by if that happened to my neighbor, just because "there are no rules". And such things can escalate quickly until you wind up with a "Hatfields and McCoys" feud that goes on for generations and nobody remembers why it started. Is that "fear"? No, it's history and human nature. Like it or not, without rules you will indeed have anarchy.

 I live in a very different culture. We both speak the same language but our points of view are far apart because of cultural and social conditioning.

At no point did I not say you don't defend your neighbour. Just because there are no set laws or rules doesn't mean nihilism or anarchy. People on the whole where I live are civilized. They stand up for people in need, one of the reasons we have free healthcare for all.

 

What I am saying is there is nothing protecting you right now. Laws don't protect, they never have done. The law against Murder has not saved those who have been murdered. It is all in people's heads, they have been programmed to think the Laws protect them so they will submit to the control of others in laws they had no say in making. That is how we have been manipulated. By conditioning people into thinking laws protect them they have been able to extract money from the population "for their own protection". Not really much different from the Mafia shaking you down and saying "if you don't pay up something very nasty will happen"

 

With no rules or Laws we all become the Police. We all agree to protect each other. It is highly unlikely we would all agree to oppress ourselves.

I haven't been raised in fear of my fellow man. We support each other where possible because of you don't your culture will break down and you end up with people preying upon others just to live. Every group is only as strong as the weakest link.

 

Freedom accepts no rules, rules are anti freedom. If you are anti freedom that puts you in the totalitarian camp and mentality, just as the Nazis were.

 

I'm not trying to get you to conform to me or my opinion, I am just stating my opinion. I am not in the business of beating my opinions into others, they either take them or leave them. I do however clarify my position for people who don't understand it. My ancestors fought in WWII. Some died doing so. They we all told the Nazis were taking away people's personal freedoms. They were told they were fighting for Freedom. As freedom accepts no rules by definition then every time Laws have been passed by governments they have pissed on the graves of every young man who died fighting for Freedom. Most of those men were not even 22 years of age. They will never have children, a wife a wonderful life. They died so you an I would not be ruled over by totalitarian governments.

 

When laws are enforced at gun point you are living in a police state. That is the state of affairs for the western world, we are living in police states where Laws are enforced at gun point which is the very definition of a police state.

I don't want to live in a police sate. I don’t want my kids to live in a police state. I want the Freedom my ancestors died for.

 

I do think I have made the point when I suggested most people who say they stand for freedom actually do not. Most people have been raised to conform (just as I was before I broke my programming) and because of that they can't entertain even in theory any other way of living. I have been kicked far too many times by "the Management" to submit to their BS just because they tell me to. People defend their programming whether it is right or wrong. No mental freedom can be obtained until people break their programming and conditioning. If you are prepared to break their rules you haven't obtained mental freedom yet. I know a lot of people who think they are clever and free thinking, but ask them to break a Law and watch them quiver at the thought such is the strength of their programming.

 

In the Old School CT scene we thought we could bring down the governments of our nations and obtain new freedoms for people by exposing the lies and cover-ups (what CT used to be called) of our governments and the people would revolt and we could all get back to living a happier life. What we found was people defended their programming. They didn't want to hear things contrary to their programming, in many cases they were so conformed they couldn't.

 

For some of us this is a war for ungrateful people to obtain their freedom so my offspring can also have freedom, the freedom we all deserve. The point of attack is people's programming. Without breaking that programming people can't be free.

Freedom starts in the Mind.

In the Western world we have been put through very dark conditioning and programming for over 70 years. People don't know what has been done to them because it is being done to all of us and we think it normal because it is happening to everyone. We have been conditioned to conform and bow to the opinions of Authority figures. That is one of their great tools they use over us. What we believe has been inserted into us while we are conforming rather than thinking and being individuals. I see the culture gap between the USA and NZ clearly, the difference in social values, the result of social indoctrination. In doing so I also see the social experimentation performed on us all in the Western world. Experimentation done by the most wealthy and influential people in the world so we won't cause them trouble and take back what they have stolen from us. All they want is to control us, by training us to conform to their created ideals and authority figures they have obtained that control without even slight resistance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Guitar Doc said:

 I live in a very different culture. We both speak the same language but our points of view are far apart because of cultural and social conditioning.

At no point did I not say you don't defend your neighbour. Just because there are no set laws or rules doesn't mean nihilism or anarchy. People on the whole where I live are civilized. They stand up for people in need, one of the reasons we have free healthcare for all.

I'm not sure how you'd know what culture I grew up in. But it doesn't matter how many people are civilized, as long as it isn't 100%.

 

5 hours ago, Guitar Doc said:

What I am saying is there is nothing protecting you right now. Laws don't protect, they never have done. The law against Murder has not saved those who have been murdered. It is all in people's heads, they have been programmed to think the Laws protect them so they will submit to the control of others in laws they had no say in making. That is how we have been manipulated. By conditioning people into thinking laws protect them they have been able to extract money from the population "for their own protection". Not really much different from the Mafia shaking you down and saying "if you don't pay up something very nasty will happen"

 

With no rules or Laws we all become the Police. We all agree to protect each other. It is highly unlikely we would all agree to oppress ourselves.

I haven't been raised in fear of my fellow man. We support each other where possible because of you don't your culture will break down and you end up with people preying upon others just to live. Every group is only as strong as the weakest link.

Laws serve as a deterrent. There would be many more murders if there were no consequences to fear. Does the average person have the time or skill to hunt down someone who murdered a friend or relative? How many of us are actually hunting down slave traders and ending child abduction? And who would be able to pay a posse to defend your neighborhood against a gang? We're not all able-bodied sharpshooters or detectives. Again, it's not about fear, it's about not being naive.

 

5 hours ago, Guitar Doc said:

Freedom accepts no rules, rules are anti freedom. If you are anti freedom that puts you in the totalitarian camp and mentality, just as the Nazis were.

 

I'm not trying to get you to conform to me or my opinion, I am just stating my opinion. I am not in the business of beating my opinions into others, they either take them or leave them. I do however clarify my position for people who don't understand it. My ancestors fought in WWII. Some died doing so. They we all told the Nazis were taking away people's personal freedoms. They were told they were fighting for Freedom. As freedom accepts no rules by definition then every time Laws have been passed by governments they have pissed on the graves of every young man who died fighting for Freedom. Most of those men were not even 22 years of age. They will never have children, a wife a wonderful life. They died so you an I would not be ruled over by totalitarian governments.

 I too am just stating my opinion and trying to clarify my position for people who don't understand it.

As I explained in my blog post (have you read it?), the only rule civilized people need is "do no harm", but then you have to define "harm". And once you do that, you have a law.

5 hours ago, Guitar Doc said:

When laws are enforced at gun point you are living in a police state. That is the state of affairs for the western world, we are living in police states where Laws are enforced at gun point which is the very definition of a police state.

I don't want to live in a police sate. I don’t want my kids to live in a police state. I want the Freedom my ancestors died for...

One does not have to be a victim of programming in order to hold a different opinion about society than you do. We just disagree. It doesn't mean there's something wrong with me or that I'm unaware of why I hold the opinions I have. And I don't mean this just about me, but about anyone who might disagree with you. It's rather arrogant to say they all must be programmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Restore formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.