Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: StonyBurk
Well, I think Franklin's point was the other way around. Rather than let pressure build to the point where violent overthrow is necessary, we are supposed to have the means to peacefully remove a rogue.

A similar argument can be made around the courts. In the 1770s, colonial courts were designed to protect the prerogatives of the King, not our unalienable rights. What do our courts do now? Do they protect our unalienable rights or the power of government to do as it wishes? When was the last time you heard of a Ninth Amendment case against the government? I can't recall one.

4 posted on 07/20/2011 7:15:39 AM PDT by Jacquerie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Jacquerie

You are right -on both counts. I have just read through much of the Cornell Law Faculty Publication on Assassination and Impeachment from last year. And it seems clear enough from that reading that Dr.Franklin was thinking of the assassinations of Caesar— and of King Charles I -and suggesting Impeachment was in the best interest of the Executive.
and as you suggest our Courts have seemed to carry on the tradition of the Colonials and protect the power of the body
they belong with over the rights of citizens. I ought not be commenting on my reading unless I’ve read a thing often enough to understand it.But I still am guilty of that sin.


5 posted on 07/20/2011 11:34:07 AM PDT by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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