OK, I've ignored this, but I can sit quiet no longer.
Let's remember a couple of things. The great US of A started through a
treasonous act. That's right. They weren't patriots, they were fighting
their king's forces. Against all law.
The laws designed to protect written after the independence thing were not
applied during that time. Less than 1/2 of the population wanted to become a
republic. By force of weapons the wants of the few were forced onto the
many. Great ideals?
So, you said the US constitution survives only because of the weapons to
back it up. What if one group believed one thing, and another group
something different. Both believe they are right. Where does it end? This is
the civil war.
The first amendment didn't stop McCarthy. How did he do that with the
freedom of speech rule? Was the governemnt on his side, effectively denying
the first amendment?
We have no freedom of speech enshrined in our constitution. It is hidden in
common law. We can pray in school. Why can't you? Yet non Christian
religions can. Freedom?
Someone once said unarmed I am a subject, armed I am a citizen. With the
exception of the US, can you show me one country that is not a monarchy or
constitutional monarchy where the freedoms proposed in their constitution
works? Why does it work in the US? They haven't figured out to shoot the
lawyers first. 8-}
How does is owning a gun a fundamental human right? You constitution (or
declaration of independence, I forget which), has those great words "liberty
freedom and the pursuit of happiness". Shooting makes me happy, but I don't
believe anyone would say it is a fundamental human right.
I love the US. I had the joy to go there recently for work. Wasn't looking
forward to it. Now I'm converted. Take me back, particularly to the South.
But please don't go on about how guns shall set you free. It's like
copulating for virginity.
Foxy
----- Original Message -----
> But the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is, essentially, to protect the
entire
> Constitution and most importantly the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech and
> to peaceably assemble to petition the government for redress of
grievances.
> That is by far the preferable method for solving problems and assuring the
> continuance of the Great Experiment - the uniquely American form of self
> governance, the constitutional representative republic.
>
> If I fear violence at all it is of the type perpetrated by agents of those
> in positions of power within the government who abuse their power by
> assaulting a nation's own citizens. While it is statistically
insignificant
> in the United States, I can think of nothing more evil on Earth. Since
the
> birth of this Republic such rogue agents have occasionally attacked
citizens
> engaged in legitimate protest. I believe that only the first two
amendments
> have kept this in check and prevented a horrifying trend toward tyranny.
>
> While others will certainly disagree I would prefer a protracted civil war
> between relatively equally armed factions than the interminable, grinding,
> mind-numbing, spirit-crushing genocide committed by a vastly superior
power
> against any who dare disagree.
>
> Above all I would prefer peace and tolerance to pursue that elusive
> happiness. Liberty, in other words.
> >
> >It's just that we here in Aus. have a very similar society to yours...
> >
>
> Unlikely. There is no society on Earth like the USA. Just as there is no
> place quite like Australia.
>
> >
> >... and we mostly manage without them.
> >
>
> The Australian government has given its citizens no choice. Where there
is
> no agreement as to recognition of fundamental human rights, all actions
are
> priveleges which can be rescinded. The concepts of self-protection,
> property ownership, free expression ... all subject to whim - and, yes,
that
> includes one of our most beloved, photography.
>
> Lex
> ===
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|