Happy Bill of Rights Day! his Day In History BILL OF RIGHTS BECOMES LAW December 15, 1791

http://www.historychannel.com/tdih/tdih.jsp?category=leadstory ^

[xp38]

still valid....if you do business with a stamp dealer they often cover a package with these old stamps

[xp38]

Oh also found the 1989 stamp too

[highball]

Too bad they didn't survive. Not to mention the ninnies who think that the BoR actually lists the only rights we have.

Not to mention the ninnies who think that the BoR only applies to the US government, and that State & local governments are free to infringe on any rights we have.

Amen to both of those. Amazing how many people are ignorant of what the Bill of Rights actually says....

[Dead Corpse]

I guess maybe we should still be thankful they aren't quartering troops in our homes.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

I'd celebrate if there were any left.

[XRdsRev]

New Jersey was the first state to ratify the Bill of Rights on November 20, 1789.

Massachusetts, Connecticut and Georgia were the last of the original 13 states to ratify, not doing so until 1939.

[TheFrog]

The worst part is many of them can be found right here, and they call themselves "conservatives".

[fivetoes]

The Annual Bill of Rights Day Celebration in Colorado will be different this year.

It will be at
Johnson's Corner in the conference Room
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Dinner will begin at 6:00 p.m.
Followed by Speakers
Dinner will be from the Johnson's Corner wonderful menu on separate checks.

Join Freedom Loving Patriots for an evening of Fellowship.


For more information and a recap of years past go here
http://www.lovelandnet.com/bord/


If you would like to give a short talk or set up a table contact Tom Buchanan
970-667-6269 or email me at minuteman05@msn.com

[Reagan Man]

"You know why there's a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one."
- Rush Limbaugh

[nustart23]

BILL OF RIGHTS, OR BILL OF 'WRONGS'

Certainly the Fourth Amendment has been misinterpreted for years. Why should a criminal suspect be given "rights"?
If a duly "warranted" police officer suspects that I have committed a crime, and believes that the evidence is in my house, why should he have to go to a judge to seek entry while I'm given time to destroy the evidence.

If I'm innocent and there is no evidence where's the harm done, and to whom?

If the President of the United States wants to listen in on my conversations to ANYONE (domestic or foreign) why shouldn't he be allowed to. If I'm guilty of anything and he or his organization finds out by my own admission over the telephone, why shouldn't I be prosecuted? If I am not doing any wrong where is the harm being done, and to whom?

The interpretation of the Fifth Amendment is another thing.

Anybody read about the man who confessed to killing his ex-girlfriend's 2 year old son? He killed the child 15 years ago, and was acquitted in court. Now in a remorseful state he admitted to police that he killed the lad and wants to be punished. Unfortunately he cannot be prosecuted because of the Fourth Amendment rule against double jeopardy.

This is ridiculous. The Double Jeopardy rule was meant to keep an overzealous prosecutor from retrying a person who has been found innocent and had proclaimed his own innocence. If he comes back and said he lied that should be enough to throw out the Rule.

These are cases where the Constitution's 10 Bill of Rights goes against our Lord's 10 Commandments. In most cases as I see them, the Bill of Rights should be called the Bill of Wrongs!