Somewhere in my life I feel I've missed something.
If it is unconstitutional to limit one's rights to association, worship or speech because of the first amendment.
If it is unconstitutional to disregard someone's constitutional rights preventing unwarranted searches or seizures because if the fourth amendment.
If it is unconstitutional to compel one to self incrimination because of the fifth amemdment.
If it is unconstitutional to deny someone their civil rights because of race, gender or ethnicity because of the fourteenth amendment.
How can parts of the country deny a citizen to their right to keep and bear arms in light if the second amendment?
Throughout this country, we have watched, and some have allowed, this degradation of constitutionally protected rights in the name of compromise. It seems so simple, and yet so many struggle with the concept.
At what point do our elected take a constitutionally legitimate stand?
At what point have we ceded our rights to the diktats of tyrants?
Are we simply complying with the Uniparty politburo so they don't bother us (as in the saying you don't have to be the fastest, just not the slowest to not get eaten by the tiger)?
Delaware has large majorities of Democrats in both chambers so this is a slam dunk. Magpul is welcome to move their production facility to my state of Indiana where we still have basic freedoms in place.
Fascism is a form of extreme authoritarianism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.
We should have an example for the definition. The First State has stepped up.
Sometimes, being first isn't a good thing. Is this the beginning of the next phase in our fight for freedom? We've always been told it's not free and certainly history is repeating once again.
Please excuse my long entry, but I feel it might be fitting for this time.
From Thomas Jefferson's letter to William Stephens Smith, the son-in-law of John Adams:
"The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two?
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure. "
I have a different take on all this, once it passes. Unfortunately, what needs to be done isn’t pleasant. At some point, and we reached it here in less than 250 years, drastic measures have to be taken. We had great privilege, and with that it was squandered in record time. But there is no organization or personalities at even local levels at this point to get the job done. So we will complain and file challenges in a corrupt and doomed court system.
Somewhere in my life I feel I've missed something.
If it is unconstitutional to limit one's rights to association, worship or speech because of the first amendment.
If it is unconstitutional to disregard someone's constitutional rights preventing unwarranted searches or seizures because if the fourth amendment.
If it is unconstitutional to compel one to self incrimination because of the fifth amemdment.
If it is unconstitutional to deny someone their civil rights because of race, gender or ethnicity because of the fourteenth amendment.
How can parts of the country deny a citizen to their right to keep and bear arms in light if the second amendment?
Throughout this country, we have watched, and some have allowed, this degradation of constitutionally protected rights in the name of compromise. It seems so simple, and yet so many struggle with the concept.
At what point do our elected take a constitutionally legitimate stand?
At what point have we ceded our rights to the diktats of tyrants?
Are we simply complying with the Uniparty politburo so they don't bother us (as in the saying you don't have to be the fastest, just not the slowest to not get eaten by the tiger)?
At what point are we no longer a united republic?
Are we there now?
Delaware has large majorities of Democrats in both chambers so this is a slam dunk. Magpul is welcome to move their production facility to my state of Indiana where we still have basic freedoms in place.
Fascism is a form of extreme authoritarianism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.
We should have an example for the definition. The First State has stepped up.
Sometimes, being first isn't a good thing. Is this the beginning of the next phase in our fight for freedom? We've always been told it's not free and certainly history is repeating once again.
Please excuse my long entry, but I feel it might be fitting for this time.
From Thomas Jefferson's letter to William Stephens Smith, the son-in-law of John Adams:
"The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two?
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure. "
I have a different take on all this, once it passes. Unfortunately, what needs to be done isn’t pleasant. At some point, and we reached it here in less than 250 years, drastic measures have to be taken. We had great privilege, and with that it was squandered in record time. But there is no organization or personalities at even local levels at this point to get the job done. So we will complain and file challenges in a corrupt and doomed court system.