"Your rights end where mine begin"

[mac]

Yes, it's the homicide that counts.

But, aren't most murders committed by guns?

Whether Australia's gun control experiment has any lessons for us or not, I don't know. It does bear watching, however, as they have the same sort of gun culture that we do.

Their government may be more competent, however.

Well according to this, homicides with firearms at it's highest percentage of overall homicides was 44%...in 1968.

 

[mac]

the reason that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed is that a well regulated militia is necessary fro the security of a free state.

No, it doesn't say anything about overthrowing the government.

I think Dangermouse is right. It's so a militia can be called up in order to supplement the military.

I have to completely disagree with this entire post.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46

 

[TurtleDude]

I have to completely disagree with this entire post.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46

as do I, indeed I have seen rather interesting and well argued assertions that what the second amendment really says is that since an organized and standing federal militia (well regulated) is a necessary evil, the people must be armed as a check against that

 

[sbrettt]

prop 8, the founders did not believe in props.

I don't think anyone here knew the founders aside from their quotes. Speculation is nice though.

 

[sbrettt]

we are the greatest nation in the world

see a correlation?

We used to be.

 

[TurtleDude]

We used to be.

too many statists in office

 

[sbrettt]

too many statists in office

Ironic how America was at it's best during the cold war.

 

[TurtleDude]

Ironic how America was at it's best during the cold war.

I would argue that we weren't at our best but that's for another time

 

[sbrettt]

I would argue that we weren't at our best but that's for another time

I am going to start that thread. The politicians of that era were outstanding though. From RFK to Eisenhower.

 

[Dittohead not!]

I have to completely disagree with this entire post.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46

It appears that Madison would have agreed with you. Now, fast forward to the 21st. century and imagine a citizen militia confronting the US military. Which do you think would prevail?

 

[Master PO]

SO now the constitutionalist supports social engineering and having the govt regulate wealth!! it's OK if it's done by a "true republican government" :screwy:

where do you get...... i wish to regulate wealth and social engineer from my statement.

did i talk of using the power of government or force....no.

i talked about returning to true republican government of the founders, their is no force there.

true republican government is its structure , what the founders created.

please read my statement properly.

 

[TurtleDude]

It appears that Madison would have agreed with you. Now, fast forward to the 21st. century and imagine a citizen militia confronting the US military. Which do you think would prevail?

I know how many people who are well versed in shooting would do against a politician who say cast the deciding vote for a law authorizing the police to break down doors and arrest anyone who refused to turn in their guns

 

[sangha]

where do you get...... i wish to regulate wealth and social engineer from my statement.

did i talk of using the power of government or force....no.

i talked about returning to true republican government of the founders, their is no force there.

true republican government is its structure , what the founders created.

please read my statement properly.

You are talking in circles. Read what you wrote. Pay attention to what I bolded

true, their are a small elite who control much wealth and power.

and our government is bought by faction, groups of special interest from that small elite, and they come from both sides of the isle.

returning to true republican government, and eliminating that faction, would return power into the hands of the people and the states, were the founders placed it to maintain a balance of power, so that one does not become to powerful and tyrannical.

How do you propose to eliminate that faction, or even return to a "true republican government" if you can neither take their wealth or power away, or deny them their right to use their wealth however they choose?

 

[sangha]

I know how many people who are well versed in shooting would do against a politician who say cast the deciding vote for a law authorizing the police to break down doors and arrest anyone who refused to turn in their guns

So do I!!

They would post an angry rant on the internet, and throw open their doors when the police came to take their guns

 

[Master PO]

You are talking in circles. Read what you wrote. Pay attention to what I bolded



How do you propose to eliminate that faction, or even return to a "true republican government" if you can neither take their wealth or power away, or deny them their right to use their wealth however they choose?

what is faction?

it is special interest/ eliminate, by return to republican government means no force.

it has nothing to do with wealth or social standing it has to do with the structure of the government, how it is created...checks and balances.

1 way to return, without any force.

repeal the 17th amendment

and i could add 2 more which would help, repeal the 16th and the federal reserve act

 

[sangha]

what is faction?

it is special interest/ eliminate, by return to republican government means no force.

it has nothing to do with wealth or social standing it has to do with the structure of the government, how it is created...checks and balances.

You haven't explained how you eliminate the elite that controls so much wealth and power, and you proposed doing?

Or is "return to republican government" a magic incantation that makes that elite just disappear?

 

[Master PO]

You haven't explained how you eliminate the elite that controls so much wealth and power, and you proposed doing?

by returning power to the state legislators.

state voice back into government, to stop favors and money flowing to those of the elite, because today senators can be lobbied......the repeal of the 17th would end that.

its very difficult to lobby entire state legislative bodies, than just 1 person.

this is why i have produce this statement from the Federalist papers many times.

The true distinction between these and the American governments, lies IN THE TOTAL EXCLUSION OF THE PEOPLE, IN THEIR COLLECTIVE CAPACITY, from any share in the LATTER, and not in the TOTAL EXCLUSION OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE from the administration of the FORMER-- federalist 63

 

[sangha]

by returning power to the state legislators.

state voice back into government, to stop favors and money flowing to those of the elite, because today senators can be lobbied......the repeal of the 17th would end that.

its very difficult to lobby entire state legislative bodies, than just 1 person.

this is why i have produce this statement from the Federalist papers many times.

The true distinction between these and the American governments, lies IN THE TOTAL EXCLUSION OF THE PEOPLE, IN THEIR COLLECTIVE CAPACITY, from any share in the LATTER, and not in the TOTAL EXCLUSION OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE from the administration of the FORMER-- federalist 63

You have not explained how to stop the elite from using their wealth and power to corrupt politicians and bribe them into passing and enforcing laws that benefit that elite.

You speak of repealing the 17th, but why would politicians do that when it takes power away from them and the elites will pay them to not repeal it?

You can rant all you want about "true republican government", but it's becoming clear you don't have a clue how to get there. There's an old saying:

Without a plan, without a chance

 

[Master PO]

You have not explained how to stop the elite from using their wealth and power to corrupt politicians and bribe them into passing and enforcing laws that benefit that elite.

The Federalist No. 40
On the Powers of the Convention to Form a Mixed Government Examined and Sustained
New York Packet
Friday, January 18, 1788
[James Madison]
To the People of the State of New York:

THE second point to be examined is, whether the convention were authorized to frame and propose this mixed Constitution.


A Mixed government or mixed constitution is a form of government where different sized groups of people control different types of issues. It integrates different forms of government, like democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy. Mixed government means that there are some issues where the state is governed by the majority of the people, in some other issues the state is governed by few, in some other issues by a single person, often defined in a constitution. Today, this idea is commonly seen as a precursor to that of separation of powers.

the house is a democracy, and it is collective by its nature, collectivism, is concerned with groups, or factions, who wish legislation passed which benefit them.....the factions.

the senate before the 17th, is an aristocracy, it means people with political experience, not royalty, by its nature it is not collective, because it is composed of 50 state legislators .............elected by the people.

since both parts of the congress are not in the same set of hands, because one is in the hands of the people and one is in the hands of the states, -------->each has a different interest.

federalist 63 is saying, ....the people vote collectively, however that collectivist activity(factions) of people in the house is excluded by the state controlled senate, which is not directly in the hands of the people.

this prevents collectivist tax laws from passing the senate, it prevents collectivist mandates on the states, because the senate has the power to stop any kind of mandate bills, it stops any legislation, which seeks to overreach into state powers by the federal government, this keeps government small and limited.

thru this structure of government... states can protect themselves from federal goverment intrusions of states sovereignty and rights of the people.

You speak of repealing the 17th, but why would politicians do that when it takes power away from them and the elites will pay them to not repeal it?

this is where you are very correct, the politicians dont want the 17th amendment repealed because it would remove their ability to be lobbied by the rich and powerful .....the elite, it would return power back to the states over the senators, and make them do what is right and in the interest of the states and its people....not the elites.

i can have ideas, but i cant make them come true, only the people can do that.

the people feel because they direct vote for their senators ,that it s a good thing, and it s not!...its bad.....because it makes the senate a democracy..... like the house, and full of faction.

that is why Madison says in federalist 10 says that...... democracy is very factious, and republican government limits faction.

if we want our government to work in the interest of the people, and for their general welfare, then we must remove the factious groups that have invaded the centralized place called d.c., where every lobbyist goes to one single location to buy, and promise our politicians they will help them get reelected.

republican government decentralizes government power and spreads it out, back to the states and the people...10 th amendment......., democracy concentrates power, into the hands of those people and groups who seek favors and, whatever else they can obtain in Washington.

 

[sangha]

The Federalist No. 40
On the Powers of the Convention to Form a Mixed Government Examined and Sustained
New York Packet
Friday, January 18, 1788
[James Madison]
To the People of the State of New York:

THE second point to be examined is, whether the convention were authorized to frame and propose this mixed Constitution.


A Mixed government or mixed constitution is a form of government where different sized groups of people control different types of issues. It integrates different forms of government, like democracy, oligarchy, and monarchy. Mixed government means that there are some issues where the state is governed by the majority of the people, in some other issues the state is governed by few, in some other issues by a single person, often defined in a constitution. Today, this idea is commonly seen as a precursor to that of separation of powers.

the house is a democracy, and it is collective by its nature, collectivism, is concerned with groups, or factions, who wish legislation passed which benefit them.....the factions.

the senate before the 17th, is an aristocracy, it means people with political experience, not royalty, by its nature it is not collective, because it is composed of 50 state legislators .............elected by the people.

since both parts of the congress are not in the same set of hands, because one is in the hands of the people and one is in the hands of the states, -------->each has a different interest.

federalist 63 is saying, ....the people vote collectively, however that collectivist activity(factions) of people in the house is excluded by the state controlled senate, which is not directly in the hands of the people.

this prevents collectivist tax laws from passing the senate, it prevents collectivist mandates on the states, because the senate has the power to stop any kind of mandate bills, it stops any legislation, which seeks to overreach into state powers by the federal government, this keeps government small and limited.

thru this structure of government... states can protect themselves from federal goverment intrusions of states sovereignty and rights of the people.





this is where you are very correct, the politicians dont want the 17th amendment repealed because it would remove their ability to be lobbied by the rich and powerful .....the elite, it would return power back to the states over the senators, and make them do what is right and in the interest of the states and its people....not the elites.

i can have ideas, but i cant make them come true, only the people can do that.

the people feel because they direct vote for their senators ,that it s a good thing, and it s not!...its bad.....because it makes the senate a democracy..... like the house, and full of faction.

that is why Madison says in federalist 10 says that...... democracy is very factious, and republican government limits faction.

if we want our government to work in the interest of the people, and for their general welfare, then we must remove the factious groups that have invaded the centralized place called d.c., where every lobbyist goes to one single location to buy, and promise our politicians they will help them get reelected.

republican government decentralizes government power and spreads it out, back to the states and the people...10 th amendment......., democracy concentrates power, into the hands of those people and groups who seek favors and, whatever else they can obtain in Washington.

Wrong again

As long as the elites continue to hold their wealth and power, they will continue to bribe politicians. You post as many quotes as you like from dead men. The fact remains, you've got nothing but a pipe dream

Without a plan, without a chance

 

[Master PO]

Wrong again

As long as the elites continue to hold their wealth and power, they will continue to bribe politicians. You post as many quotes as you like from dead men. The fact remains, you've got nothing but a pipe dream

Without a plan, without a chance

do you not agree the politicians dont want the 17th amendment repealed?

because they lose their power, and they do not wish to lose that power, because they are bought and sold by faction.

removed their power, and faction cant lobby them, because the states have the power returned to them.

why is it you want the elites out of Washington, and i want the elites out of wahsington, we cant get it done, i want it done thru the power of the people using law.

you want it though the power of government,(confiscation, regulations, high taxes) and that not going to happen, government is not going to kill its own golden goose.

 

[sangha]

do you not agree the politicians dont want the 17th amendment repealed?

because they lose their power, and they do not wish to lose that power, because they are bought and sold by faction.

removed their power, and faction cant lobby them, because the states have the power returned to them.

why is it you want the elites out of Washington, and i want the elites out of wahsington, we cant get it done, i want it done thru the power of the people using law.

you want it though the power of government,(confiscation, regulations, high taxes) and that not going to happen, government is not going to kill its own golden goose.

You still haven't explained how you can put your scheme into action.

Without a plan, without a chance

 

[Master PO]

You still haven't explained how you can put your scheme into action.

Without a plan, without a chance

i already told you, what i believe will work, but i as a single citizen, cannot change the constitution

the founders say that republican government is the most difficult government to govern, because the people have to be educated and know what kind of government they have.

and americans dont know what kind of government america is suppose to be, they think it was created as a democracy.

 

[sangha]

i already told you, what i believe will work, but i as a single citizen, cannot change the constitution

the founders say that republican government is the most difficult government to govern, because the people have to be educated and know what kind of government they have.

and americans dont know what kind of government america is suppose to be, they think it was created as a democracy.

All you said was repeal the 17th, but you haven't explained how that could be done. It's like you think it can be repealed with magic. Just repeat the words "true republican govt" enough times, and the 17th will go Poof!

 

[Master PO]

All you said was repeal the 17th, but you haven't explained how that could be done. It's like you think it can be repealed with magic. Just repeat the words "true republican govt" enough times, and the 17th will go Poof!

no that's not what i said.

i said i am just a man with an idea, i myself cannot change the constitution, i cannot change the our nation, it must be done by the people using the rule of law, or we are going to have huge problems in the future.

only returning to the structure of founding government can save us, it not going to be done, by increasing government, taxes, regulations, violating rights of the people.

and myself do dont think we have enough educated people in america , with knowledge on republican government, ...so do i think what i would like to see happen ...happen?......no

i have just stated many times, where america went wrong and off track.

again i am not the man who's going to fix and save america, only the people together can do that, and if they use, compulsory means, force on other people as a way of solving our nations problems..... they will fail.