Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Just How Did we Come to Enumerate The Bill of Rights?
Vanity | 7/04/2013 | Vendome

Posted on 07/04/2013 7:45:20 PM PDT by Vendome

The founding fathers knew that a government that was all powerful and not under the authority of its people would be a tyrannical government.

They threw one off and formed a new country with all the rights and benefits they believed a free people should have and agreed to what the rules were.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: day; happy; independance; independence; loadurgunsboys
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
 
The founding fathers knew that a government that was all powerful and not under the authority of its people would be a tyrannical government.  They threw one off and formed a new country with all the rights and benefits they believed a free people should have and agreed to what the rules were.
 
See, in 1765 King George and Parliment decided to enact the The Tax Stamp Act.  The intent of this act was that all paper would be manufactured in London and have a stamp on it, making it Lawful and legal to use for publication.  Also, The Tax Stamp Act had an imprimatur of what could be printed and anything that displeased the King, Parliment and his Henchmen would of course be made illegal to print and distribute.
 
Not good if you have some guy printing Poor Richard or have discussions in newspapers of the Colonies of those things which were at odds with London.
 
So, The Colonists rightly concluded that if King George could tax paper, then why could not tax Land, homes, businesses, plantations?  They already had a recent example by way of the Sugar Tax.
 
Further troubling to the Colonists was that none of the revenue raised would be used for the Colonies and more distressing was they had no say in what taxes would be raised as they were not represented by anyone to the king.
 
So a bit of time goes by and the king learns of the unrest and also that he is not realizing the revenue he had envisioned.
 
What to do?  Ah!  The King imposes a tax on tea.  The colonists are none to pleased that they are now paying more for tea than they were, the taxes were usurious and usurpatious and most outrageously again, they had no say in the raising of the tax and the monies would not be used by the colonists but, selfishly enjoyed by the king and parliment.  KuhRayZee?
 
Response from the King?  Nose in the air and quietly ignored the colonists while sipping tea and pouring over the treasures(property) of the colonists who had laboured mightily only to have their property and worth diminished.
 
Response from the Colonists?  Well, they dressed up like Indians and held a little protest by tossing a bunch of tea into the Boston Harbor.
 
Well, that engraged the King because it wasn't just silly to take a thing that valuable and make it no longer of value, which diminished the coffers of the King.  It was also downright disrespectful and ungrateful.
 
The king let it be known he was displeased and the Colonists rightly informed him he had gone to far.  They were the self determined individuals who had toiled and taken chances to make this wilderness into something that could profited from and enjoyed.
 
Far?  Far? The King asked.  He determined to show these pesky upstarts who was boss.
 
Some guy named Samuel Adams had the temerity to declare the colonist were self governing and even had a bill of rights that was created in 1689 and it even declares that Parliment must represent a people in order to levy taxes.  The Colonists were taxed without representation and therefore the taxes were not lawful and a bunch of other Colonists started to ignore the taxes concluding the same.
 
What to do?  So, he decided to assert his just authority over his inferior minions but realized that in order to do so only one side can have guns.
 
Parliament in 1774 passed the Coercive Acts and banned the import of firearms and gunpowder which the King then signed into law.  
 
The Colonist saw this for what it was and that was to gain complete abbeyance to the King and feilty and maybe a little ring kissing.  They weren't going to have the yoke of London locked onto their necks.
 
It was on!
 
War was inevitable but not without a few skirmishes first such as Redcoat's General Gage and a battalion seizing hundreds of barrels of powder from Charlestown.
 
The Colonists were alarmed and that day is known as the Poder Alarm for what the events were to portend.
 
It was at this point local militias marched into towns in formibable sizes enough to intimidate the officers who were under the authority of the King to resign and accept commissions of the locales they were in.
 
The Continental Congress is formed in Philadelphia and General Gage orders his Redcoats to perform warrantless searches and seize any arms and gunpowder that is found.  The people were not happy.
 
Some fat guy by the name of Ben, Benjamin Franklin engineers an arms supply deal with two of London's enemies France and Spain.  They along with a few other nations would supply the revolutionists with arms to throw off the mantle of the king.  The nations of Europe saw this an opportunity to weaken the King and agreed to supply our little insurrection.
 
The Coninental Congress then recommends to each of its citizens that prudence, self reliance and defense dictated that all citizens should be proficient in the use of arms.  It was heating up.
 
This idea arose out of the thinking of philosopher such as John Locke and Edward Coke that a just and right government was the servant to the people and as such the people reserved the right to take up arms in defense of inalienable rights and remove a disobedient servant.
 
Now this insurrection has spread across the colonies and the Colonists have had enough of being governed without say and a guy in Virginia, Patrick Henry,
 
A committee was formed that included included Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson—“to prepare a plan for the embodying, arming, and disciplining such a number of men as may be sufficient” to defend the commonwealth. The Convention urged “that every Man be provided with a good Rifle” and “that every Horseman be provided . . . with Pistols and Holsters, a Carbine, or other Firelock.” When the Virginia militiamen assembled a few weeks later, many wore canvas hunting shirts adorned with the motto “Liberty or Death."  or something like that.
 
The King and parliment make a desperate move to further gain control and in 1775 the Redcoats start outright Confiscation which led to....
 
1776 a bunch of guys in Redcoats and even more Colonist meet on a green in Concord. 
 
The Redcoats aren't stupid and they range the men who would become revolutionists by some 500 yards.  Why?
 
They are out gunned.
 
See, the Redcoats have muskets and the revolutionists have muskets but, the Redcoats muskets are not rifled, making their ammunition very unstable as it leave the barrel of the gun and their rounds were only accurate to 50 yards.  Hell, you could still kill a guy with arrows and a slingshot at 50 yards.
 
The revolutionists, on the other hand, are armed with Kentucky and Pennsylvannia Muskets and these were the original assault weapons.
 
Their rounds were accurate to 400 yards and beyond. The men bearing these were well practiced as militia men and hunters.  They don't miss or they don't eat and the Redcoats know it.
 
Well, something goes wrong, a shot goes off and that's how it started.
 
Then the Continental Congress Declares its Independence with the following:
 

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

 

You should read it and understand what the grievances were and you might ask if your government isn't doing a bit of the same.

So the war ends and at the end of it all we draft a Constitution that gives the newly formed government 17 disctinct powers and leaves all other issues to the states and really the people who now have a say in how they are governened through legislation that is voted on by the people.

In order to enforce equality of all it was necessary to define what that meant and from where the rights would be derived.  If they rights were given by the government then the government would and should have the authority the remove said rights.

However, it was determined and declared that our rights come from God and are inalienable.  The government cannot remove these rights.

They are thusly so defined below and in plain language English:


1st: Freedom of speech, religion, press, and peaceful assembly (Recall the King and his displeasure with any ideas that ran counter to his?  All governments of absolute power cannot retain power if thought is not regulated, nor it's dissemmination.)

2nd: Right to keep and bear arms (aka own firearms) (This right protects the 1st and follows order of peaceful discourse or violent defense.  Without this all other rights can be voided anytime by any political party that is in power and there would be no way to keep order)

3rd: The government can't force you to house and feed soldiers in peacetime.

4th: We are free from unreasonable searches and seizures of our homes, our bodies, or our property, conducted by government officials, and any search/arrest warrants must have proper information.

5th: Four main parts:
1 - We can't be forced to give court testimony that would incriminate ourselves, 2 - once we have been found not guilty of a crime, the government can't charge us again for the same crime, 3 - the government can't take private property for public use without justification and giving the owner proper compensation for it, 4 - before being charged with a capital crime or other serious crime, our case must be reviewed by a grand jury.

6th: We have a right to a speedy trial, and be represented by a lawyer, have the chance to challenge prosecution witnesses, call witnesses for our defense, and have a trial by jury of our peers if charged with a crime.

7th: We have a right to have civil cases heard by a jury.

8th: The government can't use torture or excessively cruel punishments nor can they require excessive bail.

9th: Just because a right is not listed in the Constitution or its amendments doesn't mean that the right doesn't exist. In other words, this demonstrates that the Constitution doesn't grant rights, it protects them, and these listed in particular.

10th: If the Constitution doesn't specifically grant a power to the federal government, it automatically stays with the people and/or state governments.

(I copied this crib note explanation from some guy at yahoo answers. Shortcut) http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090128171328AAp0vZH

A peaceful society is kept peaceful by a society that understands no man has the right to exert by force or intimidate another into doing anything contrary to what an individual wants or is morally bound by, without understanding that force will be met with an even greater force to end the aggression.

 

1 posted on 07/04/2013 7:45:20 PM PDT by Vendome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Vendome

I’ve long believed that the Tenth Amendment should have been the First.


2 posted on 07/04/2013 7:50:01 PM PDT by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
10th: If the Constitution doesn't specifically grant a power to the federal government, it automatically stays with the people and/or state governments.

This is what those who lust for power have succeeded in perverting the most. They now have people convinced that the only rights the people have are strictly delineated in the Constitution, everything else belongs to the government. Even more so is that it is the government that defines what those rights are (and aren't).

The SCOTUS has been so perverted and twisted by the power lusters that over the years they have weakened even those rights the government grudgingly allow the people and strengthened their own.

The Constitution was meant as a limit on government and it could only do what was narrowly prescribed, all other powers were to the people. It has now been turned completely upside down and the people are now at the mercy of a government as tyrannical the one our forefathers overthrew.

3 posted on 07/04/2013 7:58:41 PM PDT by jeffc (The U.S. media are our enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

The first 9 are universal personal rights that cannot be infringed upon. aa

Anything they hadn’t considered was left to the people or the states.

So I think they are in the correct order.

Not to argue your point.


4 posted on 07/04/2013 8:07:03 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
AS a side note, the Anti-federalists thought that the Constitution did not go far enough in guaranteeing liberty.

The Anti-federalist Papers

5 posted on 07/04/2013 8:24:28 PM PDT by Timber Rattler (Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome; All

If a “Right” cannot be infringed upon, then what is the penalty to be meted out to those who do infringe upon that Right?


6 posted on 07/04/2013 8:27:26 PM PDT by Graewoulf (Traitor John Roberts' Commune-Style Obama'care' violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
Anti-federalist #17, authored by 'BRUTUS' (probably Judge Robert Yeats of New York) absolutely nailed what has happened with respect to federal and judicial power usurping states rights and the will of the people:

Anti-federalist Paper #17

The “necessary and proper” clause has, from the beginning, been a thorn in the side of those seeking to reduce federal power, but its attack by Brutus served to call attention to it, leaving a paper trail of intent verifying its purpose was not to give Congress anything the Constitution “forgot,” but rather to show two additional tests for any legislation Congress should attempt: to wit–that the intended actions would be both necessary AND proper to executing powers given under clauses 1-17 of Article I Section 8. This is the fameous BRUTUS.

This [new] government is to possess absolute and uncontrollable powers, legislative, executive and judicial, with respect to every object to which it extends, for by the last clause of section eighth, article first, it is declared, that the Congress shall have power “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or office thereof.” And by the sixth article, it is declared, “that this Constitution, and the laws of the United States, which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and the treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or law of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” It appears from these articles, that there is no need of any intervention of the State governments, between the Congress and the people, to execute any one power vested in the general government, and that the Constitution and laws of every State are nullified and declared void, so far as they are or shall be inconsistent with this Constitution, or the laws made in pursuance of it, or with treaties made under the authority of the United States. The government, then, so far as it extends, is a complete one, and not a confederation. It is as much one complete government as that of New York or Massachusetts; has as absolute and perfect powers to make and execute all laws, to appoint officers, institute courts, declare offenses, and annex penalties, with respect to every object to which it extends, as any other in the world. So far, therefore, as its powers reach, all ideas of confederation are given up and lost. It is true this government is limited to certain objects, or to speak more properly, some small degree of power is still left to the States; but a little attention to the powers vested in the general government, will convince every candid man, that if it is capable of being executed, all that is reserved for the individual States must very soon be annihilated, except so far as they are barely necessary to the organization of the general government. The powers of the general legislature extend to every case that is of the least importance-there is nothing valuable to human nature, nothing dear to freemen, but what is within its power. It has the authority to make laws which will affect the lives, the liberty, and property of every man in the United States; nor can the Constitution or laws of any State, in any way prevent or impede the full and complete execution of every power given. The legislative power is competent to lay taxes, duties, imposts, and excises;-there is no limitation to this power, unless it be said that the clause which directs the use to which those taxes and duties shall be applied, may be said to be a limitation. But this is no restriction of the power at all, for by this clause they are to be applied to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but the legislature have authority to contract debts at their discretion; they are the sole judges of what is necessary to provide for the common defense, and they only are to determine what is for the general welfare. This power, therefore, is neither more nor less than a power to lay and collect taxes, imposts, and excises, at their pleasure; not only the power to lay taxes unlimited as to the amount they may require, but it is perfect and absolute to raise ;hem in any mode they please. No State legislature, or any power in the State governments, have any more to do in carrying this into effect than the authority of one State has to do with that of another. In the business, therefore, of laying and collecting taxes, the idea of confederation is totally lost, and that of one entire republic is embraced. It is proper here to remark, that the authority to lay and collect taxes is the most important of any power that can be granted; it connects with it almost all other powers, or at least will in process of time draw all others after it; it is the great mean of protection, security, and defense, in a good government, and the great engine of oppression and tyranny in a bad one. This cannot fail of being the case, if we consider the contracted limits which are set by this Constitution, to the State governments, on this article of raising money. No State can emit paper money, lay any duties or imposts, on imports, or exports, but by consent of the Congress; and then the net produce shall be for the benefit of the United States. The only means, therefore, left for any State to support its government and discharge its debts, is by direct taxation; and the United States have also power to lay and collect taxes, in any way they please. Everyone who has thought on the subject, must be convinced that but small sums of money can he collected in any country, by direct tax; when the federal government begins to exercise the right of taxation in all its parts, the legislatures of the several states will find it impossible to raise monies to support their governments. Without money they cannot be supported, and they must dwindle away, and, as before observed, their powers be absorbed in that of the general government.

It might be here shown, that the power in the federal legislature, to raise and support armies at pleasure, as well in peace as in war, and their control over the militia, tend not only to a consolidation of the government, but the destruction of liberty. I shall not, however, dwell upon these, as a few observations upon the judicial power of this government, in addition to the preceding, will fully evince the truth of the position.

The judicial power of the United States is to be vested in a supreme court, and in such inferior courts as Congress may, from time to time, ordain and establish. The powers of these courts are very extensive; their jurisdiction comprehends all civil causes, except such as arise between citizens of the same State; and it extends to all cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution. One inferior court must be established, I presume, in each State, at least, with the necessary executive officers appendant thereto. It is easy to see, that in the common course of things, these courts will eclipse the dignity, and take away from the respectability, of the State courts. These courts will be, in themselves, totally independent of the States, deriving their authority from the United States, and receiving from them fixed salaries; and in the course of human events it is to be expected that they will swallow up all the powers of the courts in the respective States.

How far the clause in the eighth section of the first article may operate to do away with all idea of confederated States, and to effect an entire consolidation of the whole into one general government, it is impossible to say. The powers given by this article are very general and comprehensive, and it may receive a construction to justify the passing almost any law. A power to make all laws, which shall be necessary and proper, for carrying into execution all powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or any department or officer thereof, is a power very comprehensive and definite, and may, for aught I know, be exercised in such manner as entirely to abolish the State legislatures. Suppose the legislature of a State should pass a law to raise money to support their government and pay the State debt; may the Congress repeal this law, because it may prevent the collection of a tax which they may think proper and necessary to lay, to provide for the general welfare of the United States? For all laws made, in pursuance of this Constitution, are the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of the different States to the contrary notwithstanding. By such a law, the government of a particular State might be overturned at one stroke, and thereby be deprived of every means of its support.

It is not meant, by stating this case, to insinuate that the Constitution would warrant a law of this kind! Or unnecessarily to alarm the fears of the people, by suggesting that the Federal legislature would be more likely to pass the limits assigned them by the Constitution, than that of an individual State, further than they are less responsible to the people. But what is meant is, that the legislature of the United States are vested with the great and uncontrollable powers of laying and collecting taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; of regulating trade, raising and supporting armies, organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, instituting courts, and other general powers; and are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws, proper and necessary, for carrying all these into execution; and they may so exercise this power as entirely to annihilate all the State governments, and reduce this country to one single government. And if they may do it, it is pretty certain they will; for it will be found that the power retained by individual States, small as it is, will be a clog upon the wheels of the government of the United States; the latter, therefore, will be naturally inclined to remove it out of the way. Besides, it is a truth confirmed by the unerring experience of ages, that every man, and every body of men, invested with power, are ever disposed to increase it, and to acquire a superiority over everything that stands in their way. This disposition, which is implanted in human nature, will operate in the Federal legislature to lessen and ultimately to subvert the State authority, and having such advantages, will most certainly succeed, if the Federal government succeeds at all. It must be very evident, then, that what this Constitution wants of being a complete consolidation of the several parts of the union into one complete government, possessed of perfect legislative, judicial, and executive powers, to all intents and purposes, it will necessarily acquire in its exercise in operation.

BRUTUS

7 posted on 07/04/2013 8:28:58 PM PDT by Timber Rattler (Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
Free stuff.

Obama promised to take care of me and my kids and said he cares for us. He is always hard working for us. We feel loved’

You should hear some of the CSPAN callers who sound like they are black,.

8 posted on 07/04/2013 8:31:19 PM PDT by sickoflibs (To GOP : Any path to US citizenship IS putting them ahead in line. Stop lying about your position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

“When the people fear the government you have tyranny, when the government fears the people you have liberty.” Jefferson


9 posted on 07/04/2013 8:49:40 PM PDT by stockpirate (If conservatives in America were committed to liberty they would Cairo DC!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
The “plain English” meaning of the 2nd amendment given here is factually incorrect. The original word “arms” is still proper plain English and while the term includes firearms it also includes arms that are not firearms. Cannon as an example are arms, were privately owned, but are not firearms per se.
10 posted on 07/04/2013 9:14:28 PM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Durus

Yep .
.


11 posted on 07/04/2013 10:01:45 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

like it


12 posted on 07/05/2013 5:04:50 AM PDT by Shimmer1 (No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

In 1776 malaria and other diseases ran rampant throughout our nation and many people died because of it. Certainly our founders would have instituted a way to guarantee health protection to the citizens if they though it was the government’s business to do so. BUT THEY DIDN’T! How dare that POS Pelosi say the founders would have been proud of the passage of nobamacare!


13 posted on 07/05/2013 6:07:42 AM PDT by New Jersey Realist (America: home of the free because of the brave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: New Jersey Realist

You’ve just insulted feces.


14 posted on 07/05/2013 6:24:29 AM PDT by IncPen (When you start talking about what we 'should' have, you've made the case for the Second Amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
I’ve long believed that the Tenth Amendment should have been the First

The order has no particular significance.

15 posted on 07/05/2013 7:20:13 AM PDT by MosesKnows (Love many, trust few, and always paddle your own canoe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
The Bill of Rights?

Interesting thread but please keep in mind that the Bill of Rights did not grant rights to the people. The Bill of Rights was included to protect your inherent rights from government interference.

The preamble to the Bill of Rights clearly explains the demand for immediate ratification.

Preamble to the Bill of Rights

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.

16 posted on 07/05/2013 7:38:04 AM PDT by MosesKnows (Love many, trust few, and always paddle your own canoe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Uh ... Vendome ... Lexington and Concord took place on April 19, 1775. The Declaration was signed in 1776.

A little homework there if you please, buddy.


17 posted on 07/05/2013 7:40:24 AM PDT by DNME (Tired of being polite? Bring back the Sons of Liberty!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MosesKnows

It shouldn’t, but it does.


18 posted on 07/05/2013 8:12:50 AM PDT by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DNME

Huh?

Let me go back and look at it.


19 posted on 07/05/2013 8:17:55 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DNME

An you are correct. the battle is four days apart from General Gage’s order to go Pall Mall with confiscation.

I had jumped ahead and had some thoughts on moving toward the Declaration in my story and never completed that thought.

I should probably sit on things like this before posting and then go over them a day or two later.


20 posted on 07/05/2013 8:29:39 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson