DHS Buys Even More Hollow Point Ammo

[AK Forty Seven]

Quote from PiggyBank:

2) None of those guys are starting a war or even trying to start a war. They are saying its inevitable. Ask yourself honestly why the population is being polarized.. is it because one side is really just a bunch of sore losers OR is it because our govt is becoming increasingly oppressive and operating outside of the limits placed upon it?

3) You don't think so, really? Listen to your boy Coumo, that guy is a fucking disgrace to this nation. He isn't the only one.

And as has been pointed out many times, the Constitution can be changed, and there is a process to do so. Attempts to circumvent that process or undermine our rights through legislation just isn't legitimate, and will create problems. Besides I'm not even certain that the Bill of Rights or any part of it can be repealed for any reason, ever.

"The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals...t establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." - Albert Gallatin

One said he is buying ammo for the civil war,another said he would support it under certain circumstances.There are thousands of other posts on forums and comment sections all across the internet saying the same thing.I defend their right to say that under the first amendment but I also support The Government and DHS preparing themselves for those threats

The government is only overstepping their bounds if The SC says they are doing something unconstitutional.Obama nor Coumo has not tried to enforce any laws The SC has ruled unconstitutional.Obama and Cuomo were voted in by the people of this country and citizens of NY.I don't agree with either of them on every issue but thats who the people voted in so I accept and abide by their laws.


I'm not 100 % positive but I think the bill of rights can also be changed.

 

[AK Forty Seven]

Quote from pspr:

As Abraham Lincoln, who led the United States during its fiercest battle over human rights -- the Civil War -- said of the Declaration more than a half-century later, its signers "meant simply to declare the right so that enforcement of it might follow as fast as circumstances might permit. They meant to set up a standard maxim for free society, which would be familiar to all and revered by all; constantly looked to, constantly labored for, and even though never perfectly attained, constantly approximated, and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its influence and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people of all colors everywhere."

The Constitution is the law coming out of
The Declaration of Independence which is the creed.

What part of the Constitution says we can abolish the government by force ? What amendment ?

 

[pspr]

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

I'm not 100 % positive but I think the bill of rights can also be changed.

The Bill of Rights is just the first 10 amendments that were added just after the Constitution was written. Anything in it can be changed by Amendment but try getting 2/3 of the country to agree on anything regarding the Constitution today.

 

[PiggyBank]

Quote from Lucrum:

Just the only one constantly being demonized for it.

Yea that is really getting OLD. No one living was a slave or owned a slave.. shit my family didn't come to America until AFTER slavery was abolished. I'm supposed to feel guilty about this, really? well I don't and I can't take anyone whining about slavery seriously.

 

[PHOENIX TRADING]

Quote from PiggyBank:

2) None of those guys are starting a war or even trying to start a war. They are saying its inevitable. Ask yourself honestly why the population is being polarized.. is it because one side is really just a bunch of sore losers OR is it because our govt is becoming increasingly oppressive and operating outside of the limits placed upon it?

3) You don't think so, really? Listen to your boy Coumo, that guy is a fucking disgrace to this nation. He isn't the only one.

And as has been pointed out many times, the Constitution can be changed, and there is a process to do so. Attempts to circumvent that process or undermine our rights through legislation just isn't legitimate, and will create problems. Besides I'm not even certain that the Bill of Rights or any part of it can be repealed for any reason, ever.

"The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals...t establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." - Albert Gallatin

When the time comes vigilante's will liquidate US govt agents and collaborators as they expose themselves and are most vulnerable.
(btw : confiscation of guns won't protect you from this if you are a scumbag agent of the state)

The US govt will have to resort to separate zones for the housing of their units and families. yep whole secured compounds with families of the party and it's drones will have to be built because gubbermint will try to play nasty. The effect of that will be the targeting of wives , children and parents. It's not pretty but this is how a pre-insurrection is obligated to operate.

Just like the green zone in afghanistan, everything else is hostile territory and you lose the ground once you physically go back to base camp.

When govt elites and worker drones have walled themselves off from their subjects, the real insurrection starts.
(I don't think politicians or the military learned much from the Vietnam war, expect strange bedfellow alliances for the expedient import of military grade weapons for the insurgency).

Once the gov"t drones and elites have chose sides "KILL'EM ALL, LET GOD SORT IT OUT.

Better hope uncle sam gets his head outta his ass cause this could be our future in 30yrs.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

One said he is buying ammo for the civil war,another said he would support it under certain circumstances.There are thousands of other posts on forums and comment sections all across the internet saying the same thing.I defend their right to say that under the first amendment but I also support The Government and DHS preparing themselves for those threats

The government is only overstepping their bounds if The SC says they are doing something unconstitutional.Obama nor Coumo has not tried to enforce any laws The SC has ruled unconstitutional.Obama and Cuomo were voted in by the people of this country and citizens of NY.I don't agree with either of them on every issue but thats who the people voted in so I accept and abide by their laws.


I'm not 100 % positive but I think the bill of rights can also be changed.

Useful Idiot

 

[AK Forty Seven]

Quote from pspr:

The Bill of Rights is just the first 10 amendments that were added just after the Constitution was written. Anything in it can be changed by Amendment but try getting 2/3 of the country to agree on anything regarding the Constitution today.

Thanks

 

[PiggyBank]

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

1) One said he is buying ammo for the civil war,another said he would support it under certain circumstances.There are thousands of other posts on forums and comment sections all across the internet saying the same thing.I defend their right to say that under the first amendment but I also support The Government and DHS preparing themselves for those threats

2) The government is only overstepping their bounds if The SC says they are doing something unconstitutional. 3) Obama nor Coumo has not tried to enforce any laws The SC has ruled unconstitutional.Obama and Cuomo were voted in by the people of this country and citizens of NY.I don't agree with either of them on every issue but thats who the people voted in so I accept and abide by their laws.


I'm not 100 % positive but I think the bill of rights can also be changed.

1) I can't speak for them, but to me that just means they think it's coming. i don't see any call to arms and revolution in those statements. You don't know why the DHS is stocking up on ammo, none of us do, which is the reason I asked WHY?

2) I disagree. So did Thomas Jefferson: “….To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous
doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are
as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for
power, and the privilege of their corps…and their power is more dangerous as they are in office for
life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has
erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and
party, its members would become despots….”

If you've read the Constitution then you would know that the govt is doing things that document doesn't authorize them to do. Blatant example, no ability to carry in IL or DC, clearly a right that is being violated.

3) being elected doesn't give one dictatorial power. What would you do if Congress passed a law banning religion and the SC upheld it? Obviously that would violate the 1st Amendment, but they were elected so it would be ok right?

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from PiggyBank:

1) I can't speak for them, but to me that just means they think it's coming. i don't see any call to arms and revolution in those statements. You don't know why the DHS is stocking up on ammo, none of us do, which is the reason I asked WHY?

2) I disagree. So did Thomas Jefferson: “….To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous
doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are
as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for
power, and the privilege of their corps…and their power is more dangerous as they are in office for
life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has
erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and
party, its members would become despots….”

If you've read the Constitution then you would know that the govt is doing things that document doesn't authorize them to do. Blatant example, no ability to carry in IL or DC, clearly a right that is being violated. For example

3) being elected doesn't give one dictatorial power. What would you do if Congress passed a law banning religion and the SC upheld it? Obviously that would violate the 1st Amendment, but they were elected so it would be ok right?

Fantastic rebuttal.

 

[PHOENIX TRADING]

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

Thanks

More importantly what if the SC said you were only 2/3 a person(since you are a black man) as pushed by the anti-slavery crowd before the civil war?