The Real Issue.

J

John/az2

New member
I found this among the e-mail responses on World Net Daily: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Missing the point?

I believe I have heard every Second Amendment argument there is, on both sides. All these arguments are unrelated to the REAL ISSUE. Therefore, I don't think there is ANY REASON to be overly concerned about what, in particular, the Congress or the president does to us anymore. Here are the reasons:

The Second Amendment is there for one purpose -- as the ultimate protection against the power of government. It allows weapons to always be available for a needed revolt against any tyrannical government. That means ANY TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT. There is no such thing as "good government." Gen. Washington was correct in his observation that "government is force."

The Second Amendment is quickly being repealed and interpreted out of existence, before a successful revolt can take place. Are you getting this?

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights cannot stop tyranny. Only guns can, maybe.

I have stopped worrying about this or that gun ban or registration scheme, regulation or amendment. I already know, deep down, why I own guns. Guns will be VERY NECESSARY when "permission" to keep them is eventually denied. Remember, the government is not going to give me permission to revolt.

We must take that action out of free will and the thirst for liberty. When the need arises, and it will, we must use our guns for their REAL INTENDED PURPOSE. We are following in the footsteps of giants. Their words should serve as a guide:

'The strongest reason for people to retain their rights to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government,' said Thomas Jefferson.

Years later Abraham Lincoln said, "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it."

When the time comes to use our guns, it will be the very last chance we have to preserve this nation.

L. PRICE[/quote]

------------------
John/az

"Just because something is popular, does not make it right."

www.countdown9199.com
 
Well, of COURSE we have to be concerned; If we can stop the current slide towards tyranny at the ballot box, we won't have to resort to the cartridge box. What sort of loon thinks police state legislation should be of no concern to us, because in the ultimate extremity we can always revolt? Especially when that legislation is aimed, by tiny degrees, at foreclosing that option?
 
I don't think we should stop trying to halt the absurd and unconstitutional laws that seem to be streaming from all over the place
by peaceable means, I really hope that we can muster enough support to do it. But I also think that we as a people should be thinking and preparing for the other way that our frededom may be restored if need be. YMMV!!

------------------
fiat justitia
 
Brett,

The problem is that the first two boxes no longer work. I b'leeve that's the point the writer was trying to make.

Personally, I don't bother calling or writing the treasonous bastards anymore either. The only ones who don't blow me off (Bob Smith and Ron Paul) are literally voices crying in the wilderness. So why bother?

FWIW, people are openly talking about revolution. Not just in the gun shops and ranges, and certainly not just online. I mean in the bars and on the street; in the grocery stores and at the library.

I hope to (insert deity of your choice here) that it doesn't come down to the cartridge box. I have no problem with dying, but I'd rather die fighting a foreign enemy rather than a domestic.

------------------
How does it become a man to behave toward this American government to-day?
I answer, that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it.
--Thoreau, "Civil Disobedience"

[This message has been edited by Coinneach (edited June 01, 1999).]
 
Well, Coinneach, I'm from Michigan, and it's far from proven that they don't work HERE. What IS proven, I'd say, is that our current approach to the first two boxes isn't working.

Let me ask you a question: What does it take to win elections, and what would it take to win a war? And does our failure to win elections say anything about our probablity of winning a war? I'd say that you need everything to win an election that you need to win a war, except the guns. Ok, we've got the guns; Have we got the rest of it? And if so, why are we losing the elections?
 
Brett,

One state has kept its collective head through the last few months. One. Yours. It's nice to see that the process still works somewhere, but on a national level, I just don't see that we're having an effect.


------------------
How does it become a man to behave toward this American government to-day?
I answer, that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it.
--Thoreau, "Civil Disobedience"
 
Well, as I say, Coinneach, let's get back to my point about waging war: You need several things:
1. Guns. Fine, we've got those.
2. Resources. At the moment that boils down to money, and we've got that, too.
3. Numbers. Hey, we're what, a third of the population? Half of which doesn't vote? Got that one nailed.
4. Leadership. Whoa, got a problem here. As you must know if you've seen our feckless leaders from the NRA on TV lately.

Now, here in Michigan we persue a simple strategy: If someone crosses us, WE GET EVEN. Even if it means someone worse gets the seat. So Republicans know damned well that the fact that their Democratic opponent is worse won't save them if they betray us!
Sadly, that's a strategy the NRA won't use, as you can see from the NRA's cave in on the GOP gun control bill. They're not willing to make our enemies pay no matter the cost, and so our former allies see no cost in becoming our enemies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top