CharlesMorrison
Banned
Link Removed
Why Do You Carry Concealed?
- Thread starter lukem
- Start date
Link Removed
mojo risin
Banned
Let's see if we can't clear up some of your buddy's incredible ignorance, shall we?
Uhhh, no.
Our founders didn't want a democracy because they were predatory elitists who wanted to self rule to further their own personal interests.
They wanted an aristocracy where power rested solely in the hands of wealthy white men like themselves.
They preferred a classic Roman republic where the senate wasn't elected, but appointed, so that the elites controlled congress - not the people.
They weren't afraid of a monarchy, they wanted to BE the monarchy.
You can see this in article 1 section 3 of the constitution: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof
In case you and your buddy hadn't noticed - this was fixed by the 17th amendment.
By allowing the people to elect our law makers, we became a democratic republic.
So your ridiculous claim that we are a republic, not a democracy is the same as saying a Corvette is an automobile, not a Chevrolet.
If you need any more help, just let me know.
Uhhh, no.
Our founders didn't want a democracy because they were predatory elitists who wanted to self rule to further their own personal interests.
They wanted an aristocracy where power rested solely in the hands of wealthy white men like themselves.
They preferred a classic Roman republic where the senate wasn't elected, but appointed, so that the elites controlled congress - not the people.
They weren't afraid of a monarchy, they wanted to BE the monarchy.
You can see this in article 1 section 3 of the constitution: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof
In case you and your buddy hadn't noticed - this was fixed by the 17th amendment.
By allowing the people to elect our law makers, we became a democratic republic.
So your ridiculous claim that we are a republic, not a democracy is the same as saying a Corvette is an automobile, not a Chevrolet.
If you need any more help, just let me know.
BC1
,
Ben Franklin defined America as a republic right around the time the continental Congress was meeting. That's simply historical fact.
.
Perspectives on the Constitution: A Republic, If You Can Keep It - Perspectives on the Constitution: A Republic, If You Can Keep It - National Constitution Center
.
Nearly all of the delegates harbored objections, but persuaded by Franklin's logic, they put aside their misgivings and affixed their signatures to it. Their over-riding concern was the tendency in nearly all parts of the young country toward disorder and disintegration. Americans had used the doctrine of popular sovereignty--"democracy"--as the rationale for their successful rebellion against English authority in 1776. But they had not yet worked out fully the question that has plagued all nations aspiring to democratic government ever since: how to implement principles of popular majority rule while at the same time preserving stable governments that protect the rights and liberties of all citizens.
.
There was much in the culture and environment that contributed to a national consensus and cohesion: a common language; a solid belief in the principles of English common law and constitutionalism; a widespread commitment (albeit in diverse forms) to the Protestant religion; a shared revolutionary experience; and, perhaps most important, an economic environment which promised most free, white Americans if not great wealth, at least an independent sufficiency.
.
As we look at the state of our federal union 211 years after the Founders completed their work, there is cause for satisfaction that we have avoided many of the plagues afflicting so many other societies, but this is hardly cause for complacency. To be sure, the US Constitution itself has not only survived the crises confronting it in the past, but in so doing, it has in itself become our nation's most powerful symbol of unity--a far preferable alternative to a monarch or a national religion, the institutions on which most nations around the world have relied. Moreover, our Constitution is a stronger, better document than it was when it initially emerged from the Philadelphia Convention. Through the amendment process (in particular, through the 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th Amendments), it has become the protector of the rights of all the people, not just some of the people.
.
There is a story, often told, that upon exiting the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was approached by a group of citizens asking what sort of government the delegates had created. His answer was: "A republic, if you can keep it." The brevity of that response should not cause us to under-value its essential meaning: democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely dependent upon the active and informed involvement of the people for their continued good health.
There isn't much division here, just one or two trolls hanging around. The difference between us and the anti-gun liberal forums like MDA and Brady where they would be more accepted is that we don't ban them from posting their views that differ from ours - we just don't agree with them and post facts to show why we disagree with them and allow readers to make informed decisions. Groups like MDA and Brady don't have facts that support their views so they have to resort to banning people who disagree with them on their forums. They rely upon continual propaganda to feed the mindless lemmings that follow them.
Why do I carry concealed? That was the original question, right? I choose to carry because i am a husband and father and the primary responsibility to protect my wife and kids is mine. I will not depend upon law enforcement for this protection because, even though I believe most leo's are good folks, they cannot be everywhere. Part of protecting my family is protecting myself when I am not with them so that they do not have to face the economic struggles that would come with losing the main breadwinner of our family. Also, Even though I am an imperfect father and husband, there is no one who can be a better father to my children or husband to my wife than I can. Lastly, I carry because I have dedicated my life to serving others and if that service requires intervention in a violent situation, I want to have the tools necessary to protect others. This is why I carry.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
CharlesMorrison
Banned
Hey! Mrs Mojo Rasin....
Link Removed
Link Removed
(How's Shannon doing?)
Link Removed
Link Removed
(How's Shannon doing?)
mojo risin
Banned
<Roaring laughter>
Hey Chuckles.
I don't know how to break this to you, but the post from BC1 that you "liked" just reiterated exactly what I said, that Franklin's Republic - where the senate was appointed, not elected, and which focused on free, white Americans, Has "Through the amendment process become the protector of the rights of all the people, not just some of the people."
Beeman's point was damn clear,...
"Democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely dependent upon the active and informed involvement of the people for their continued good health."
It is the very ability and willingness to amend our constitution through the democratic process which allows us to maintain a republic.
It would be interesting to see how many folks here believe as Chuckles and LT do, that the Constitution "set up a system of checks and balances to help limit the potential for an immoral majority developing within the American People".
This from a "moral majority" which condoned slavery, and only considered wealthy white men true Americans.
You know, Sheldon Addleson's vision.
The Koch brother's vision.
The Tea party vision - they didn't just pull that name out of a hat, they were created by wealthy white men like Rupert Murdoch who want to revert to a "simpler" time when they were worshiped for their wisdom.
If you believe in the 2A, then you best wake up.
If those people ever take control of this country, they will be the textbook example of the tyranny the 2A spoke of - because ALL such tyrannies are built on greed - and if you think for a second that they will allow you bear arms against them once they gain control, then you best stop thinking until you get a little better at it.
Sure, they use hatred of the government to rally you all, but once you help them gerrymand their way into power, they won't waste any time telling you "enemy combatants" to go phuk yourselves the minute you question their motives.
After all, they're the job creators, you ungrateful scum - where would you be without them?
You'll do all their work, you'll pay all their bills, you'll die to protect their empires,... and they will revel in the grand lifestyle you provide for them.
It will truly be the "republic" our founders envisioned.
Hey Chuckles.
I don't know how to break this to you, but the post from BC1 that you "liked" just reiterated exactly what I said, that Franklin's Republic - where the senate was appointed, not elected, and which focused on free, white Americans, Has "Through the amendment process become the protector of the rights of all the people, not just some of the people."
Beeman's point was damn clear,...
"Democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely dependent upon the active and informed involvement of the people for their continued good health."
It is the very ability and willingness to amend our constitution through the democratic process which allows us to maintain a republic.
It would be interesting to see how many folks here believe as Chuckles and LT do, that the Constitution "set up a system of checks and balances to help limit the potential for an immoral majority developing within the American People".
This from a "moral majority" which condoned slavery, and only considered wealthy white men true Americans.
You know, Sheldon Addleson's vision.
The Koch brother's vision.
The Tea party vision - they didn't just pull that name out of a hat, they were created by wealthy white men like Rupert Murdoch who want to revert to a "simpler" time when they were worshiped for their wisdom.
If you believe in the 2A, then you best wake up.
If those people ever take control of this country, they will be the textbook example of the tyranny the 2A spoke of - because ALL such tyrannies are built on greed - and if you think for a second that they will allow you bear arms against them once they gain control, then you best stop thinking until you get a little better at it.
Sure, they use hatred of the government to rally you all, but once you help them gerrymand their way into power, they won't waste any time telling you "enemy combatants" to go phuk yourselves the minute you question their motives.
After all, they're the job creators, you ungrateful scum - where would you be without them?
You'll do all their work, you'll pay all their bills, you'll die to protect their empires,... and they will revel in the grand lifestyle you provide for them.
It will truly be the "republic" our founders envisioned.
CharlesMorrison
Banned
Link Removed
mojo risin
Banned
I certainly sleep better knowing there are people like Chuckles out there defending my rights.
Although I would feel better if he were a comic book hero, instead of just a reader.
Although I would feel better if he were a comic book hero, instead of just a reader.
CharlesMorrison
Banned
Link RemovedLink Removed
mojo risin
Banned
So, go ahead.
Post those "facts".
Well, explain it to us, LT.
Inform the members here why it's unfair for our government to prevent a minority of it's citizens from developing enough "firepower" to defeat this awful tyranny?
Attack the evil oppression that exists in this country of ours.
For example, explain why John Singer, Adam Swap, Jim Jones, or David Koresh should have been able to defend their community's "God given" right to take multiple wives - even minors?
Explain why groups like Posse Comitatus and sovereign citizens - who rely on the protection of our military to defend their property and loved ones - should be allowed to take up arms against the government when it comes time to pay the bill?
Why idiots like Palin are somehow justified in promoting succession to her fellow Alaskans - the biggest recipients of federal handouts in our history - so they can independently horde the natural resources of land the rest of us paid for?
Or is it just that you feel we should all simply defer to your own superior moral barometer?
I can hardly wait to hear your final solution.
(I would ask Chuckles, but I suspect he can't even address his complaints about this government without saying nigger at least once.)
BC1
,
You need to stop right now. If you're gonna use words like that don't get too comfortable. It's not tolerated here.
CharlesMorrison
Banned
And that last sentence is why you are no longer relevant..
And, why you are now on the ignore list...
Your mother must be so proud to have a living abortion for a child..
ETA: you entire post has been quoted so that you will not be able to avoid the truth.
Link Removed
CharlesMorrison
Banned
Right here my new friends! ^^^^^
