Boston Marathon bombing...

[Live2ride883]

And great quote by Ben Franklin, a person anybody could look up to; but could he have foretold the times we find ourselves in now?

That quote is especially relevant today, because of the times we find ourselves in now.

 

[androidluvr2]

Look at the black man. Has he ever received any kind of justice no.

This is not only a false statement, it is an incredibly offensive and racist statement. yuck.

 

[Live2ride883]

The time is coming when the constitution will hang by a thread and it is up to we the people, to decide whether or not to continue following the guidance set forth by our forebears.

A government that is made by the people, for the people, and of the people is a government that must listen wholeheartedly to what it's citizens say.

The reaction that the Boston police showed after the bombings was a blatant violation of the fourth amendment. I realize that the city was in a state of panic, but that is not just cause to go trampling all over our rights as citizens of this country.

Every man, woman, and child is guaranteed these rights as delegated to them by the constitution. And it is not within the government's right to revoke them at their leisure. They were not intended to be rights granted to us by the government as that would imply that they could be taken away from us by those who represent us. No they were intended to serve as a guideline to establish the basic liberties that every citizen of this nation is entitled to.

Thus is not how our country should be representing itself on the world stage. For it is this nation that serves as the example for democracies around the world. And it is this nation that sets the standard for them to follow.

Thank you.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

Honestly, that time is here now. Why do you think they are going after the second amendment first. Because once they take it away (for our own good, safety of the children) we will have no means of defending/protecting our other rights.

 

[Live2ride883]

I will never agree with this...

 

[llamabreath]

I will never agree to this:

 

[llamabreath]

Nor this:

 

[Serial Fordicator]

Ok, what if they didn't go house to house when they thought they had him isolated and he killed more people? Don't you think that everyone playing Monday morning quarterback will surely complain that we should've been a helluva lot more proactive that day?

Them going house to house performing martial law did not catch him. If I'm not mistaking, I believe they had called off the door to door martial law and told people they could go back outside. It was then when a man seen blood on his boat

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

 

[llamabreath]

Them going house to house performing martial law did not catch him. If I'm not mistaking, I believe they had called off the door to door martial law and told people they could go back outside. It was then when a man seen blood on his boat

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Yes, I've already mentioned that.

Don't remember if it was this thread though... I think it was the martial law thread.

 

[Serial Fordicator]

And great quote by Ben Franklin, a person anybody could look up to; but could he have foretold the times we find ourselves in now?

Yes. I say that for the simple fact that him, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and alot more, came from a country and found out what a government with too much power can do. I read a lot of all of their writings and am amazed at the knowledge they had and all of the warnings we do every day. I am particularly amazed at Thomas Jefferson. Some of the things he's written is almost like he could foresee the future.



ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

 

[Serial Fordicator]

We fear what we can't see or control (terrorism), yet we have no fear of that which we can see and control (government). I'm not saying I agree with terrorism. We need to remove the gloves and let terrorist know by attacking us is a mistake. I also don't know why we give the countries that despises our very existence money that we do not have.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

 

[Aquila]

Trusting in the Government to grant us rights or check their own power is a fallacy. The People are the check on that power, and honestly the founding fathers never intended the Constitution to last more than a couple of generations without being either readopted by convention or updated via amendment to modernize with society. We've fallen into the trap of letting the Congress or the President tell us how they intend to use the Constitution as a weapon against us, rather than it being our shield against them. It cannot be both and they're not going to protect our Rights for us.

Attempting to think about some sort of dueling priority between freedom and security is also a fallacy... there might be a more optimal balance, but every compromise degrades the value of both. And this silly concept of people changing their morals or behaviors because of laws or religion or whatever is absurd. This creates a [FONT=lucida grande, tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif]a childish moral paradox ... "I do what is right only because someone wants me to, not because I choose to do so because I believe it to be right". This is the danger of a fear based hierarchical relationship, absent actual moral honesty and capable only of instilling a feigned sense of obligation towards servitude to an either inarticulate or unjustified position of selfish supremacy over an ignorant or inferior subject. [/FONT]

[FONT=lucida grande, tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif]If we give away our freedom, we are not going to gain security. People are not going to stop being criminals because we change the laws, and as we get more laws, obviously more people will be violating them. We can of course mitigate damage... but why wouldn't we instead focus on creating a more highly educated, higher functioning society in which poverty, superstition and cruelty are minimized? It seems pretty obvious that we're at a crossroads... the Government isn't following the existing Constitution and, while we agree with the principles, our society has clearly evolved and there may be things we want to add, to protect and better expound upon existing rights, or take things out to further limit the powers Government assumes.

There is already a huge movement for a Constitutional Convention in order to amend the Constitution to remove corporate finance of election campaigning and lobbying... perhaps a secondary movement for a full rewrite could piggyback on the assumed impending success of the former? I'm sure some State governments are better, but at a Federal level, 100% of the elected and appointed officials are corrupt. Voting them out won't help, because it's not We The People who choose who they'll be running against. You can either have a fascist hypocrite or a hypocritical corporate elitist who will sell out at the first sniff of a dollar. Neither one will ever represent what you need.

This just got into the tl/dr category again.. sorry.[/FONT]

 

[Serial Fordicator]

Trusting in the Government to grant us rights or check their own power is a fallacy. The People are the check on that power, and honestly the founding fathers never intended the Constitution to last more than a couple of generations without being either readopted by convention or updated via amendment to modernize with society. We've fallen into the trap of letting the Congress or the President tell us how they intend to use the Constitution as a weapon against us, rather than it being our shield against them. It cannot be both and they're not going to protect our Rights for us.

Attempting to think about some sort of dueling priority between freedom and security is also a fallacy... there might be a more optimal balance, but every compromise degrades the value of both. And this silly concept of people changing their morals or behaviors because of laws or religion or whatever is absurd. This creates a [FONT=lucida grande, tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif]a childish moral paradox ... "I do what is right only because someone wants me to, not because I choose to do so because I believe it to be right". This is the danger of a fear based hierarchical relationship, absent actual moral honesty and capable only of instilling a feigned sense of obligation towards servitude to an either inarticulate or unjustified position of selfish supremacy over an ignorant or inferior subject. [/FONT]

[FONT=lucida grande, tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif]If we give away our freedom, we are not going to gain security. People are not going to stop being criminals because we change the laws, and as we get more laws, obviously more people will be violating them. We can of course mitigate damage... but why wouldn't we instead focus on creating a more highly educated, higher functioning society in which poverty, superstition and cruelty are minimized? It seems pretty obvious that we're at a crossroads... the Government isn't following the existing Constitution and, while we agree with the principles, our society has clearly evolved and there may be things we want to add, to protect and better expound upon existing rights, or take things out to further limit the powers Government assumes.

There is already a huge movement for a Constitutional Convention in order to amend the Constitution to remove corporate finance of election campaigning and lobbying... perhaps a secondary movement for a full rewrite could piggyback on the assumed impending success of the former? I'm sure some State governments are better, but at a Federal level, 100% of the elected and appointed officials are corrupt. Voting them out won't help, because it's not We The People who choose who they'll be running against. You can either have a fascist hypocrite or a hypocritical corporate elitist who will sell out at the first sniff of a dollar. Neither one will ever represent what you need.

This just got into the tl/dr category again.. sorry.[/FONT]

The problem with changing the constitution, is there are only a few politicians who doesn't have special interest in their back pocket or their political party as their agenda over the good of the people.

Its truly sad, but I trust our dead patriot forefathers more than these people in office now.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

 

[Aquila]

The problem with changing the constitution, is there are only a few politicians who doesn't have special interest in their back pocket or their political party as their agenda over the good of the people.

Its truly sad, but I trust our dead patriot forefathers more than these people in office now.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Those in office now wouldn't be the new framers. The States will choose delegates.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[Live2ride883]

Trusting in the Government to grant us rights or check their own power is a fallacy. The People are the check on that power, and honestly the founding fathers never intended the Constitution to last more than a couple of generations without being either readopted by convention or updated via amendment to modernize with society. We've fallen into the trap of letting the Congress or the President tell us how they intend to use the Constitution as a weapon against us, rather than it being our shield against them. It cannot be both and they're not going to protect our Rights for us.

Attempting to think about some sort of dueling priority between freedom and security is also a fallacy... there might be a more optimal balance, but every compromise degrades the value of both. And this silly concept of people changing their morals or behaviors because of laws or religion or whatever is absurd. This creates a [FONT=lucida grande, tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif]a childish moral paradox ... "I do what is right only because someone wants me to, not because I choose to do so because I believe it to be right". This is the danger of a fear based hierarchical relationship, absent actual moral honesty and capable only of instilling a feigned sense of obligation towards servitude to an either inarticulate or unjustified position of selfish supremacy over an ignorant or inferior subject. [/FONT]

[FONT=lucida grande, tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif]If we give away our freedom, we are not going to gain security. People are not going to stop being criminals because we change the laws, and as we get more laws, obviously more people will be violating them. We can of course mitigate damage... but why wouldn't we instead focus on creating a more highly educated, higher functioning society in which poverty, superstition and cruelty are minimized? It seems pretty obvious that we're at a crossroads... the Government isn't following the existing Constitution and, while we agree with the principles, our society has clearly evolved and there may be things we want to add, to protect and better expound upon existing rights, or take things out to further limit the powers Government assumes.

There is already a huge movement for a Constitutional Convention in order to amend the Constitution to remove corporate finance of election campaigning and lobbying... perhaps a secondary movement for a full rewrite could piggyback on the assumed impending success of the former? I'm sure some State governments are better, but at a Federal level, 100% of the elected and appointed officials are corrupt. Voting them out won't help, because it's not We The People who choose who they'll be running against. You can either have a fascist hypocrite or a hypocritical corporate elitist who will sell out at the first sniff of a dollar. Neither one will ever represent what you need.

This just got into the tl/dr category again.. sorry.[/FONT]

Well worth the read, and I only had to read certain sections more than once .

 

[geekymcfly]

This is not only a false statement, it is an incredibly offensive and racist statement. yuck.

Well, have they?

TMO GS3 * NEXUS 7

 

[Serial Fordicator]

Those in office now wouldn't be the new framers. The States will choose delegates.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

Yes, but who do you think would pay to campaign to be said delegates.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

 

[Serial Fordicator]

Well, have they?

TMO GS3 * NEXUS 7

From what I usually see, the person who screams of racism are usually the only ones that have the problem with what race they are.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

 

[geekymcfly]

From what I usually see, the person who screams of racism are usually the only ones that have the problem with what race they are.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Well not in this case.

TMO GS3 * NEXUS 7

 

[gollum18]

As long as the current method of electing officials persists, the only people who will be choosing representatives are big business conglomerates.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Serial Fordicator]

Well not in this case.

TMO GS3 * NEXUS 7

You also noted the trayvon Martin case. Why? You should be mad at the media for editing the 911 tape trying to turn this into a race thing. As far as if George was in self defense, only he knows that.

I heard a story the other day where a 16 year old was shot by police and the community was up in arms saying it was racial. What they didn't say was the little dumbass pointed a gun at police. Who is to blame?

Is it racial that 2 black gang members shot a white woman trying to rob her then shot her baby in the face?

Enough of the racial self pity bs. If everyone was against minorities, we wouldn't have a minority in the white house especially one that said himself he was Muslim. America sounds pretty tolerant to me.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ