How Many Amendments Can We Violate? Let Us Count the Ways ...
|
Submitted by: dbthayer  Subscribe to this Author Paste this code into your site to promote this story! |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-yVu8x8oC0
Type of Content: Video Second & Fourth for starters. Get a load of this ... Read »
Created 6 weeks 4 days ago
Made popular 6 weeks 4 days ago |
- Flag as offensive
- Login or register to post comments
- 179 reads
As I recall the NRA sued over this and won. Although they had to fight tooth and nail to get the guns returned, even though the judge had told the police to return them.
Also a number of states have now passed laws to ban gun confiscations in emergencys. But it shouldn't be necessary to pass such laws since it is blatantly unconstitutional to enter homes without a warrant or seize guns without a warrant in the first place.
It looks like we need a couple of new constitutional amendments. How about this;
28th Amendment - The constitution means what it says.
29th Amendment - Police officers, police chiefs, mayors, governors, state and federal legislators, judges and presidents who violate the constitution or the constitutional rights of American citizens shall be deemed guilty of a felony. They shall be immediately removed from office, prohibited from ever again occupying an office of the public trust and sentenced to 20 years in prison without possibility of parole or pardon.
the total taxes any citizen pays including: income tax, sales tax, fees, surcharges, and fines shall not exceed 10% of her total income.
all joking aside, the problem with the constitution is the fact that it is essentially a 'piece of paper'. no matter how flawless it is and how great life would be if the government actually followed it, there is one thing missing. the missing piece is the complete lack of a viable enforcement scheme to uphold it. this is not specific to the United States but is rather visible all throughout history of all countries guided by a constitution (at least to my knowledge). we have been stuck so far on a rollercoaster because of a lack of an foolproof enforcement scheme. we revolt, institute a constitution, the constitution is disregarded, albeit gradually, by the ruling class, then we again find ourselves at a point where a 'revolution' must take place, and so on and so forth.
without a foolproof enforcement scheme to uphold the constitution, this is just another revolution, surely not the last one.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
(And by Mr. Jefferson, I don't mean George Jefferson.)
David
If ever a time should come when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin. (Samuel Adams)
but that's exactly my point. no one has yet come up with a fool proof method of enforcement of the constitution. it's something to think about. there has to be a solutions for this, rather than periodic revolutions.
Only he said, "Weezy, the tree of liberty must be soaked from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants, like that turkey Bunker that we used to live next to."
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
Sorry to have missed your show today Tom.
I'm sure that this only gives them confidence that this type of procedure can be successfully implemented on a wider scale if a national emergency were declared. This is a very scary precedent.
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
that's my feeling exactly. testing the waters first. i'd like to know whether anybody has taken this situation through the court system yet. maybe that would be a bad thing to do though, what if they lost.
been spending a little too much time on infowars
ehhem....mull..... to.........en.....ehhem cough,,,,, tom.....cough, gasp
Alex would claim it was all planned in advance by the mysterious guys in the star chamber. I am saying that now that they've done it, they can use this as a procedural guide for a wider emergency. This is how you get results that look like a conspiracy (and suck just as much).
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
FYI - this is from the Glen Beck show. More and more, as I listen to Beck (especially his radio show), he seems like a decent enough guy and is truly concerned about the direction of this country. I just disagree with him vehemently on foreign policy. Other than that he at least claims to be libertarian.
i've watched him a couple of times. he contradicts himself. to me that's a dud. no matter what bits he decided to agree on regarding freedom and liberty. you cannot pick and chose. that's deceptive. so thumbs down for beck.
so cops stole guns from property owners and then left? that's surreal. but it makes perfect sense in today's world.