The American Constitution

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Oblivion437: Well my basic point is a disarmed populace (one that willfully puts itself so, no less) is just begging for dictatorship. Once you take people's power to resist away, you can then begin taking away anything you want. Let's not forget how far peaceful protests got people in China.

Any system is only as just as its ability to oust scoundrels.

Oblivion, I note your post re-flogs a well made point that I want to reiterate: though guns are not banned, they a VERY restricted and regulated. No one except a peace officer may own a pistol in Chicago. In Illinois, if you are travelling with a gun in the car it must be broken down and made inoperable. Gotta put your ammo and gun separate, too. Oh, don't forget that you gotta get a gun license from the state first -- 2 wks wait at least. There are so many damned rules that I, an attorney, can't be bothered to jump through the hurdles and get a gun for home protection.

Yorick, this is a horse that gets flogged over and over again around here. At least Oblivion had the good sense to go grab an old thread rather than start it again. Besides, do you really want to pass up the chance to advocate Nanny Government, including gun banning, SUV banning, and cameras in public to enforce smoking bans? [img]tongue.gif[/img]

ACK!!!! The undead horse of floggetude just will not die!

[Night Stalker]

[img]graemlins/wow.gif[/img]

Ack! The dead arise! [img]graemlins/whip.gif[/img]

This is a CODE: VERONICA!
Just to be sure [img]graemlins/whipitgood.gif[/img]

[Oblivion437]

Yorick, my point is, some people just don't give a shit about human suffering. If people staged protests in Iraq, or in China, do you think anything would have happened? Often showing someone the right way is most productive, but there are times, like in the American Revolution, the Russian Revolution and World War 2, where the only way is to beat them back with their own methods. It worked in India because the British government could be hard-nosed for only so long. It would never have worked against the Nazis, unless it was before they were in power. Too many variables to honestly say.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Besides, do you really want to pass up the chance to advocate Nanny Government, including gun banning, SUV banning, and cameras in public to enforce smoking bans?

Anti-Americanism should be renamed Anti-Timberism.

"The American way of life is not negotiable" - Timber Loftis

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Besides, do you really want to pass up the chance to advocate Nanny Government, including gun banning, SUV banning, and cameras in public to enforce smoking bans?

Anti-Americanism should be renamed Anti-Timberism.

"The American way of life is not negotiable" - Timber Loftis [/QUOTE]Excuse me?? Hmmm.... TOS.
I don't remember stating what you quoted, and doubt I would except in jest. Can you cite it for me, or are you joking, or perhaps lying?

It is funny. You attribute to me exactly what I find problematic in your views: non-negotiability. This is exactly the problem I had in the smoking ban thread. Didn't I ask, beg, cajole, and plead for us to reach a compromise? Weren't you adamant, stolid, and unwavering in your view on smoking, not even willing to consider any option other than taking my liberty?

Any one on this site will tell you that if I have one worth-while quality it is being able to view an issue from more than one side. Heck, I'm so adept at this I often have trouble actually knowing what my point-of-view is.

Parroting my criticism back at me won't fool anyone on here, Yorick. Grab a mirror and do some deep self-analysis. It is you who are "not negotiable."

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: I don't remember stating what you quoted, and doubt I would except in jest. Can you cite it for me, or are you joking, or perhaps lying?

It's the famous George Bush quote regarding the Kyoto pact. Your SUV comment brought it to mind. I just used it to sum up your attitude Timber. "Change" seems to be something you are not willing to address.

[Mouse]

Enough already. Everyone knows by now that IW is not a forum for personal bickering.

Behave

[ElricMorlockin]

Originally posted by Yorick: [QB] Why were the founding fathers so much smarter than anyone alive today?

Simply because "some" people today, think they are smarter than they were. With such notions as, ideas like these are two-hundred years old and in need of "updating". Great ideas, never get old.

Why are the founding fathers trusted more than people today?

Because we have far too many control freaks these days. "Some" people want to legislate every damned thing we do. Typically these same people are also anti-personal responsibility. In addition its much safer to trust a dead person who had fantastic ideas, than it is to trust many of the live people who think every thing they say should be part of an unwritten gospel, which all the rest of us are forced to live by. On top of this, their ideas have stood up to the endless scrutiny of these very same people. Trust is built on realism not idealism.

Were they not human?

Sure they were, but look what their ideals meant. Stack those against the idealogues of today. I still like what they had to say regardless of the amount of time that has passed. Their ideas are timeless, simply because of the context they can be placed in, even a thousand years from now.

Have they now been made gods? Whose word is irrefutable and unchanging.

Talk like that is always quite frightening Yorick. It seems that both sides of the fence always like to use "language" such as this to debase classical thinking. Are they gods? Of course not, however their "word" is irrefutable and unchanging because of the principles upon which they were built. For instance, you are a self described devout Christian. My guess is that one of the reasons for such is that you can see the wisdom in the words that were laid out by Jesus
Do *they* need to be changed just to placate a new aged movement for needing to update fantastic concepts, merely to placate the here and now types? No, I think not, the wisdom is timeless. That my friend, is the same context shared with the founding fathers of America. It isnt a religion (though to some it could potentially be), but again, great ideas never get old and are normally proven to be correct an endless number of times, for those willing to internalize the true meaning, rather than nitpicking perceived incorrect details

Were they creating laws for a society of 280 million people?

280 million, 300 billion it doenst matter. Did Grog the caveman think that his new invention, the wheel, would wind up powering billions of pieces of machinery, trains, planes, cars, turbines etc? I doubt it, yet the principle of the wheel is as sound today as it was for good old Grog.

Collected from around the globe? A nation that stretches from coast to coast, including a pacific Island and Arctic territory?

What difference does that make? Let me answer that for you..... NONE.

A nation with computers, uzis nuclear warheads, cars, planes, aids, massive homelessness and obesity, with television and manufactured stars/icons, with financial priests of the stockmarket, and the chance to cryogenically freeze your head? With the psychological problems associated with living in todays world?

Now geee, how did I know this was coming?

Just because America has the same name as then, does not make it the same county. It exists in a radically different place within the fourth dimension...time.

Sound like a great idea for a song or something Yorick. Let me clue you in, since you are still a so called "temporary visiting alien", not a citizen.
1.) I again say to you, if you believe the place to be so damned heinous, why did you come here? I for instance believe in the concepts of heaven and hell, and wouldnt beg God to send me to Hell, in order to experience the culture.
Of course the answer to that is that it *ISNT* such a damnable place now is it?
2.) There is no such thing as perfection, however, that has never stopped human beings from trying.
3.) If you only look at the glass as half full, then you will never *get* the thoughts of the founding fathers. If you noticed, there is no guarantee for success in our laws, only the guarantee for the freedom to try without the interference of government. Which also means that cry babies who cannot succeed here, do not get the right to legislate away the successes of others. Although that does seem to be a somewhat popular idea de joure.
4.) In the distant future when ideas are judged, I am more than sure that the scholars of then will scratch their heads at the number of people who persued every conceiveable "ISM" instead of merely following the simple logic, of a free society. Indeed, I will go a step further, that eventually people will always want to go back to the basic tenents of personal liberty.

As such, guns are no longer slowly loading single shot arms, but sleek machines of death.

Yes, I wonder what the poor whiners who insisted that bronze was the best metal for weapons did, when their enemy showed up with iron weapons? The point is, the tool is an inanimate object. My favorite line from the Conan the Barbarian movie involved the "Riddle of Steel". "Steel isnt strong boy, flesh is stronger. What is the sword without the hand that wields it."
Btw... your guitar could be considered a sleek machine of death as well. It takes alot of electrical power to make it work, which of course requires fossil fuels or nuclear energy (being that you live in NYC) to make it produce the sound you want. How many poor birds, bugs and yeast cultures have laid down their lives in order for you to produce music? Do you see how nonsensical things can get Yorick?

They cannot be banned in America, becasue the founding fathers decreed it.

Which is fine by me. In one of Jefferson's letters he discussed his own reasonings behind the second ammendment being so prominent in the numeric scheme of things.
A.) Protection against a tyranical government. A means to fight back.
B.) He foresaw a day when a government system would try to disarm the populace, followed shortly by an elimination of other civil liberties.

And just to enlighten you further Yorick, as one US citizen to one wanting to become one, we have our fair share of the "ISM" followers over here. Who do you really think is the thin line between you having and not having liberty? Sign carrying protestors? That is laughable. A sign cannot stop a bullet after all.
Someone like me, sincerely questions the intent of another person, who cannot trust me to responsibly excercise my rights, when you are uneffected by me doing so. No sir, I dont need any control freak telling me what I can and cannot do. THAT is why the Constitution is etched in stone, to protect my liberties from the "cause" de joure. The cool thing to whine about today, before forgotten about tomorrow because the next "cool thing" to whine about is on the doorstep.
I'd add that there are more than a few countries you could move to in order to get what you want. That is your legislated feeling of safety. Any one of our European compatriots can fill you in on their strict gun laws, and then the ensuing school shooting where alot of people get killed. But didnt they *have* laws against such? To understand law, one must understand the criminal not the law abiding. Once you master that understanding then you will no longer have any problem with how a person excercises their rights freely.

The word of the American founding fathers is practically impossible to redesign. Even though the applicable words are an AMMENDMENT.

If you understand ammendments, and the history of such, you wouldnt have begun this thread. In one sense and one sense only is the Constitution a living document, and that is that it can be ammended to. However, who can tell me an issue that actually requires a Constitutional Ammendment right now?

Almost every western democratic nation has revised their constitution. Changing it as society changed.

Which is a weakness not a strength. When religious messages are changed to placate the time, the relgion loses its vitality, its true meaningfulness. In likeness changing governmental structure is ludicrous when the reason for doing so is merely to placate the insecurities of a "sign of the times person". The Nazi's, Commies et al., taught us those lessons in very painful manner. Who was and who wasnt listening Yorick?

Their leaders are no different to their leaders of the past. Arguing about what's right. Angling for their cause. Representing a portion of the community. Thinking lustful thoughts about a woman they work with.

Ah, but where do you see the founding fathers, "angling" for the morality de joure? In addition, they had *JUST* lived through true oppression. Can many of us actually make the same claim with credibility? Few if any I assert.
Lets have a look.

I.)Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free excercise therof, or abridging freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievences.

Wow, now there is an "old fashioned" idea, no isnt it Yorick? Yeah we certaintly need to "update" that one, we cant have people going around speaking their mind, worshipping who or what they want and protesting peacefully when un-happy about a given set of circumstances..... Yes indeed, we need a good updating.
So being that we need an updating lets take a look at the kind of legislation you seem to want, in order to meet societies needs of the day.
The so called campaign finance reform law, so generously given to us by McCain and company, limits your ability to say anything negative about a sitting candidate within sixty days of an election cycle. That ANY candidate, from the President all the way down to the head of the garbage department. This is a fine example of your "new-aged" thinkers, for the "sign of the times". So, hmmmm let me think about this, do I follow the outdated, outmoded thinking of men who have been dead for over 225 years, but guaranteed me the ability to dissent, or do I follow the whiners de joure who are protecting me from negative campaign commercials. Wow, now *thats* a difficult decision...

Yet, Americans today are prisoners. They are imprisoned by the chains of the past. By the deification of words agreed on by a group of humans. Imperfect humans trying to forge their way through a hostile planet and difficult life. No different to you and I.

Heil Hitler.... Oooops.... I mean Heil Yorick!
This reasoning of yours, is the negative message most of us reject because it reeks of what I have mentioned in my entire post. I can think for myself, thank you for very much, and am doing my best at making it through this "hostile planet" filled with trepidation, uncertainty, calamity etc. Alas Babylon! How *will* I survive? Simple, I have been provided with etched in stone liberties to protect me from the neo-thinkers who worship "ISM's". That is what *they* hate the most Yorick, they cannot simply walz in and disenfranchise me, while forcing their damnable "ISM" down my throat, whether I think its meritable or not. [img]graemlins/beheaded.gif[/img]


GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Heck, I'm so adept at this I often have trouble actually knowing what my point-of-view is.

I had to laugh at this statement TL [img]smile.gif[/img] I have upon occasion wondered which side you were trying to support in a discussion