This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

For the First Time In Many Decades, More Americans Support Gun RIGHTS than Gun Control

George Washington's picture




 

Pew notes:

A shift in favor of gun rights

For most of the 1990s and the subsequent decade, a substantial majority of Americans believed it was more important to control gun ownership than to protect gun owners’ rights. But in December 2014, the balance of opinion flipped: For the first time, more Americans say that protecting gun rights is more important than controlling gun ownership, 52% to 46%.

 

***

 

Most believe gun ownership – not gun control – makes people safer.

 

***

 

Other recent data confirm this pattern. A 2013 Pew Research survey showed that protection is now the top reason gun owners offer for why they choose to own a gun (in 1999, hunting was the top reason). And among the public at large, the latest Gallup survey finds that 63% of Americans now say having a gun in the home makes it a safer place compared with 30% who say it makes a home more dangerous. Fifteen years ago, more said the presence of a gun made a home more dangerous (51%) than safer (35%).

Majority of Americans Say Having a Gun in the House Makes It Safer

Are Americans right that guns help prevent crime?

There are dueling statistics.  Everyone has heard the argument that guns increase murder.

But Boston Magazine notes:

A study from 2007 published in a Harvard University journal … claims that more control over firearms doesn’t necessarily mean their will be a dip in serious crimes.

 

In an independent research paper titled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?,” first published in Harvard’s Journal of Public Law and Policy, Don B. Kates, a criminologist and constitutional lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Ph.D., a Canadian criminologist and professor at Simon Fraser University, examined the correlation between gun laws and death rates.

 

***

 

“International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths. Unfortunately, such discussions [have] all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative,” the researchers wrote in their introduction of their findings.

 

In the 46-page study, which can be read in its entirety here, Kates and Mauser looked at and compared data from the U.S. and parts of Europe to show that stricter laws don’t mean there is less crime. As an example, when looking at “intentional deaths,” or murder, on an international scope, the U.S. falls behind Russia, Estonia, and four other countries, ranking it seventh.  More specifically, data shows that in Russia, where guns are banned, the murder rate is significantly higher than in the U.S in comparison. “There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, [the latter] is, in fact, false and [the former] is substantially so,” the authors point out, based on their research.

 

Kates and Mauser clarify that they are not suggesting that gun control causes nations to have higher murder rates, rather, they “observed correlations that nations with stringent gun controls tend to have much higher murder rates than nations that allow guns.”

 

The study goes on to say:

…the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world. ***

“If more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death, areas within nations with higher gun ownership should in general have more murders than those with less gun ownership in a similar area. But, in fact, the reverse pattern prevails,” the authors wrote.

Professor James Wilson notes:

It's also important to note that guns play an important role in selfdefense. Estimates differ as to how common this is, but the numbers are not trivial. Somewhere between 100,000 and more than 2 million cases of self-defense occur every year.

 

There are many compelling cases. In one Mississippi high school, an armed administrator apprehended a school shooter. In a Pennsylvania high school, an armed merchant prevented further deaths.

And see this, this and this.

In any event, even a top liberal Constitutional law expert reluctantly admits  that the right to own a gun is as important a Constitutional right as freedom of speech or religion:

Like many academics, I was happy to blissfully ignore the Second Amendment. It did not fit neatly into my socially liberal agenda.

 

***

 

It is hard to read the Second Amendment and not honestly conclude that the Framers intended gun ownership to be an individual right. It is true that the amendment begins with a reference to militias: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Accordingly, it is argued, this amendment protects the right of the militia to bear arms, not the individual.

 

Yet, if true, the Second Amendment would be effectively declared a defunct provision. The National Guard is not a true militia in the sense of the Second Amendment and, since the District and others believe governments can ban guns entirely, the Second Amendment would be read out of existence.

 

***

 

More important, the mere reference to a purpose of the Second Amendment does not alter the fact that an individual right is created. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is stated in the same way as the right to free speech or free press. The statement of a purpose was intended to reaffirm the power of the states and the people against the central government. At the time, many feared the federal government and its national army. Gun ownership was viewed as a deterrent against abuse by the government, which would be less likely to mess with a well-armed populace.

 

Considering the Framers and their own traditions of hunting and self-defense, it is clear that they would have viewed such ownership as an individual right — consistent with the plain meaning of the amendment.

 

None of this is easy for someone raised to believe that the Second Amendment was the dividing line between the enlightenment and the dark ages of American culture. Yet, it is time to honestly reconsider this amendment and admit that … here’s the really hard part … the NRA may have been right. This does not mean that Charlton Heston is the new Rosa Parks or that no restrictions can be placed on gun ownership. But it does appear that gun ownership was made a protected right by the Framers and, while we might not celebrate it, it is time that we recognize it.

Indeed, the Founding Fathers’ own words prove Professor Turley right:

What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.
– Thomas Jefferson

A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
– George Washington

(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
–James Madison.

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government…
– Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist (#28) .

To disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them.
– George Mason

The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.
–Noah Webster, “An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (1787) in Pamplets on the Constitution of the United States (P.Ford, 1888)

The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.
–Samuel Adams, debates & Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87.

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.
–Patrick Henry.

Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn’t.
– Ben Franklin

Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property… Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.
–Thomas Paine

Are we at last brought to such an humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms under our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?
– Patrick Henry, 3 Elliot, Debates at 386.

The right of the people to keep and bear…arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country…
–James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789).

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.
–Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-B.

[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or the state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People.
– Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

Believe it or not, even pacifist leaders like Gandhi and the Dalai Lama are opposed to gun control. And scholars say that gun control has racist origins.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 04/21/2015 - 12:06 | 6014746 large_wooden_badger
large_wooden_badger's picture

A "well-regulated militia" simply means an armed populace that can successfully serve as a check and balance to the corrupting power of a centralized government. It's too bad the Whiskey Rebellion didn't have one, or the victory would have gone to the farmers instead of Hamilton and his crony distillers. All enemies, foriegn and domestic.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 11:17 | 6014582 sbenard
sbenard's picture

It's because when the wicked rule, the people mourn.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 10:34 | 6014410 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

Awesome. I think people are waking up to gubmit lies and false flags (Newtown?) and realizing that it's a violent world out there where you may need to use force to protect yourself.

When help is needed in seconds, 911 will somebody there in minutes.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 10:27 | 6014381 Niall Of The Ni...
Niall Of The Nine Hostages's picture

Yes, well. Now that the American people support gun rights, I'm sure our masters will get right on restoring them to us, along with theri right to issue money and regulate its value.

Note as well that military technology has progressed quite a bit in 230 years. Have fun practicing with the pop-guns your masters still let you play with. The bad guys have cobalt-salted bombs. Next time they drive old Dixie down, they'll make damn sure she never rises again.

Fantasies of a second American revolution make me smile too, but that's all they are. When Uncle Sugar finally dies, and if he happens to not take humanity to hell with him immediately, whatever comes around to feast on his corpse will outgun you.

Buy one small gun, learn how to use it, and keep just enough bullets for it that when the time comes you can send your loved ones, and then yourself, to the only world the meek were ever going to inherit. Beyond that? Face it, you're not fooling anybody but yourself.

We're all riding on the tiger. Don't count on getting off alive.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 10:16 | 6014319 p00k1e
p00k1e's picture

People are soft.

Run an experiment.

Claim you have a nest of feral cats living under your porch,

Ask around on the best approach to killing these cats.  Mention you don’t want dead cats under the porch stinking the place up.

Watch as people will freak out!   These are the very same people who will be turning you in to authorities. 

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 10:26 | 6014377 shovelhead
shovelhead's picture

Only the truly stupid would freak.

Anyone with even a modicum of sense would tell you to get a big dog.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 10:02 | 6014250 shovelhead
shovelhead's picture

Why are things the way they are?

Because we didn't say shit. When they ignored the law or changed it to their benefit, nobody held anyone accountable. No recall elections, no disbarring judges, no calling reps on their votes.

Nothing. Once the press was a watchdog and informed people, even if they wore their bias on their sleeve. Now the MSM is a cheerleader for the corrupt.

Why? Because we didn't care enough to watch our employees and acted like trust fund kids who were entitled to our freedom and blithely expected responsibility from those we pay to do their jobs.

Now we're broke and the employees are the trust funders at our expense. Paying the cost to be the boss only works if you act like you are and not let the hired hands run amok.

Pointing a finger leaves three pointing back and only the truly honest among us will admit it, and blaming those that came before us because they did the same is true, but it still leaves no excuse for inaction.

We just lie in the bed we made for ourselves and cumulatively, it has become less comfortable. Now we have a Govt. that murders with impunity and cops that drive tanks on our streets.

That's what happens when the hired hands start running the company while the bosses don't look in from time to time.

Yeah, I know all the excuses. I've used em all myself too.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 09:52 | 6014220 BearOfNH
BearOfNH's picture

Way back then, the term "well-regulated" meant the same as "well-trained", rather than "subserviant". You can see this for yourself in the book 1776, where there are a couple letters from Geo. Washington where he uses the term "well-regulated" but it is clear he means "well-trained".

I recall one letter that went roughly: "In order to maintain a well-regulated militia, evey farmer must fire his musket at least once a month".

Farmer or no, that's still good advice.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 09:36 | 6014173 Gohigher
Gohigher's picture

GW's article has spawned interesting responses and brought forth the troupe performing yet another act from the play of the historically enlightened. I am not really one of GW's followers.

Every "movement" spawns a leader, this is just human nature. ZH appears to house V-s, Greens, Constitutionalists,guillotine-ists, anarchists, liberal thinkers and many other stripes here, commenting and representing ..Fuck you mindless-bots and trolls. Where cometh the fearless leader of the novo-Americans willing to incite the use of force ? (because mnewn's comment is historic fact for rapid change) The USSA's pot never quite boils, and it becomes a new year. Ponder how the Matrix grows as the populace allows. Was Gruber right spot on?

Yet, I still dream of the day when a little Red Hen asks for help and floodgates open to re-bake the muffin lost.

Then I wake up and continue my contribution of informed dissent, individual resistance, targeted secession and light preparation for a few dark scenarios. Not an easy path in the twilight years, raging against the machine.
NO free shit in my future, mothercluckers...I choose.

Damn that bird flu .. Hope she makes it.
But they shoot Hens, don't they ?

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 08:57 | 6014052 Reaper
Reaper's picture

Power corrupts. Absolute power by government guns only corrupts absolutely. Even if you trust all your present government masters, everything in Nature changes. A king dies, replaced by his degenerating spawn. What if your trusted present government masters are removed in a coup? Who'll protect you?

There is no safety in trust. There is no safety in fantasy. There is no safety from government. Nature or God protects those who protect themselves.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 08:45 | 6014030 lakecity55
lakecity55's picture

molon labe

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 07:15 | 6013877 f16hoser
f16hoser's picture

I guess Eric Holders Gun/Mind Control scheme is back-firing! Tee, Hee, Hee....

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 06:22 | 6013823 Aussiekiwi
Aussiekiwi's picture

In any event, even a top liberal Constitutional law expert reluctantly admits  that the right to own a gun is as important a Constitutional right as freedom of speech or religion:

 

lol, just wait a few years, the idea of freedom of speech will seem a dangerous prelude to Terrorism and it will just have to go....around about the same time the Internet becomes government controlled and any alternative viewpoints to the government is shut down, all to prevent terrorism of course and to keep you nice and safe......now who could object to that?

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 06:13 | 6013817 SnatchnGrab
SnatchnGrab's picture

Two books: "More Guns, Less Crime," and "Why Everything You know about Gun Control is Wrong", both by John Lott. Forewarning: They are very dry, with loads of statistics. Couple of key takeaways:

1) In counties where there is open and concealed carry, murder, armed robbery and assault went down - significantly. Break-ins (esp when people weren't home) went up slightly.

2) If you remove one demographic (black men between the ages of 18-40) from the computations, the murder rate in the USA drops to that of Switzerland.

Finally, as somebody wiser than me once said, " 'Gun Control' is not about guns."

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 03:37 | 6013730 chirobliss
chirobliss's picture

If this crap is true, why is America the place where police can take your possessions with impugnity, where people are regularly killed by the FBI whilst in custody, why is it as a nation the most surveilled by their own government, the most frightened to walk the streets of their own cities, why do people in America get executed repeatedly for crimes they didn't commit, and why are Americans such pathetic frightened pants wetters?

Because guns don't make democracies work, or protect you from tyrants, and guns clearly don't make your government give you any additional liberties. You are a pathetic whiny bunch of backwoods hicks who have no idea why you have the few liberties you retain.

You also are imbeciles when trying to understand why other peoples of western democracies don't constantly scream tyranny at their governments. It is because the rest of us enjoy true rights, backed by a strong social contract. You have become a nation of selfish, navel-gazing, weak willed, slovenly minded fools who swallow any pablum that is shot your way in order to keep you scared and compliant. What a pathetic country!

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 07:17 | 6013882 f16hoser
f16hoser's picture


Socialism is the New-Age Communism. Nuff said.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 06:25 | 6013825 Aussiekiwi
Aussiekiwi's picture

Got a few anger issues there chirobliss? I can see why you should not have a firearm, amongst your rant was this line that I found very funny.

"It is because the rest of us enjoy true rights, backed by a strong social contract.'

Where exactly are you from?

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 10:38 | 6014426 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

Isn't the 2nd amendment a declaration of an inalienable right? Angry people like him prolly shouldn't have guns though.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 07:13 | 6013873 WOWurstupid
WOWurstupid's picture

Aussie he must be from OZ

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 05:47 | 6013807 WOWurstupid
WOWurstupid's picture

Where are you from Bozo?

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 07:54 | 6013947 samcontrol
samcontrol's picture

he will never answer.

but i will for him. Sweden.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 01:52 | 6013670 Shitgum Suicide
Shitgum Suicide's picture

Well I'll be a Son of gun. GW has written an article that is pro-America and doesn't contain a plethora nonsense or garbage. You actually managed to get more citations of sources outside of your blog.

I commend you and hope you keep it up. Just a thought. Try only to link to your site when you are siting your own opinion about something rather than as fact. It makes your posts have credibility.

Have a good night.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 00:28 | 6013560 crisrose
crisrose's picture

School shooting on deck in 1...2...

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 10:38 | 6014431 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

STAGED school shooting on deck in 1...2....   tfify

Mon, 04/20/2015 - 22:57 | 6013384 Seize Mars
Seize Mars's picture

Who, exactly, is behind gun control? Take a wild guess.

https://thezog.wordpress.com/who-is-behind-gun-control/

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 07:06 | 6013864 Cloud9.5
Cloud9.5's picture

There are a group of American Jews that are following the same path as their brothers in Europe and it may very well end in the same result.  They have secured for themselves positions within the machine.  Having done that, they seem confident that they can manipulate it indefinitely to their own ends.  Jews overwhelmingly support the liberal agenda of the Democratic Party.  That party is also the home the majority of blacks.  Within the black population, the message of Louis Farrakhan has taken on a resonance.  In addition, many Muslim Americans have been drawn to the Democratic Party.  This is not the same mix we had last century with southern Democrats and northern Democrats. This new mixture is oil and water and it may very well fragment the party over such issues as gay rights and the survival of Israel.  Black Muslims and Middle Eastern Muslims would relegate American Jews to the dustbin of history.  Many prominent Jews have taken notice of recent attacks on Jews coming from within their own party. 

 

Having not experienced the same fate as their European brethren, many powerful Jews hold no reverence for the second amendment and the fly over country that supports it.  Still there are some that are awake.  http://jpfo.org/

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 10:45 | 6014438 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

+1000 for the jpfo ref. Been a follower of theirs for over 20 years!

These folks know what the hell is going on, don't live in a fantasy world of unicorns and skittles.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 05:51 | 6013810 WOWurstupid
WOWurstupid's picture

Yea one commie from Cleveland is good to blame a Zionist conspiracy. Hey asshole ever hear of Aaron Zellman?

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 08:19 | 6013978 Seize Mars
Seize Mars's picture

WOWurstupid

Yes I know of Aaron Zelman, a fine American. I would be proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with him. Unfortunately he appears to be an exception to the rule.

Apparently, according to the link I found and posted, there appears to be a very organized and well-defined agenda among Jews to disarm Americans.

Look dude I am not anti-Jew no matter what you think. If I was I would just say it, but I'm not. Unfortunately most Jews are very much anti-me, however (as shown by the link).

America has become 1930's Nazi Germany. Just look around you. Spend about 5 minutes browsing http://www.policestateusa.com/ and tell me I'm wrong. And it appears that Jews are at the forefront of trying to disarm us. What exactly do you want me to do about it? Nothing? I'm going to squawk about it. I'm going to warn everyone I can, because the danger is real, this isn't a fucking joke or a game.

As a Jew, what would you do if you woke up in a version of 1930's Germany? Nothing? Or would you try to warn others of the looming danger?

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 00:17 | 6013543 Prober
Prober's picture

You gave me a VERY personal pragmatic reason to oppose jews in USA government, thank you.

The Founders should have added the following statement to the Right to Bear Arms:

"AND The People shall have not just the Right, but also the Duty, to use arms against any persons, in or out of government, who attempt to restrict or deny the The People the Right to bear arms, and the Right to form armed militias to preserve their Rights, Liberties, and Freedoms under this Constitution."

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 07:16 | 6013879 WOWurstupid
WOWurstupid's picture

Do a little research on the relationship Goerge Washington (the real one) had with the Jewish community of this country. 

Mon, 04/20/2015 - 23:22 | 6013444 weburke
weburke's picture

pew.....well that is a trustable source.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 00:24 | 6013553 George Washington
George Washington's picture

Pew is liberal. Since liberals are currently the main proponents of gun control, they have motivation NOT to report  that America has turned pro-gun rights.

Judges call this "a declaration against interest" or an "admisison against interest". it makes it more credible.

Get it?

Mon, 04/20/2015 - 23:58 | 6013511 Seize Mars
Seize Mars's picture

Just facts. All verifiable from other sources.

Sorry bro, truth hurts I guess.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 03:20 | 6013715 GuusjA
GuusjA's picture

Ryan Heath ziet de Europese Unie als 'een organisme' die het mystificeren van de bron van de 3e SpinozaGolf tot KUNST heeft verheven.  

 

http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/5133/Media-technologie/article/detail/3968709/...

 

Archief van netwerk WitteGejT is niet meer toegankelijk voor netwerk @MinPres. 

 

http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2015/04/21/brand-uitgebroken-in-ambassade-veren...

 

Hevige prijsbewegingen in aandelen @GuusjA komt doordat ...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcQ-hb_T6gI

Mon, 04/20/2015 - 21:40 | 6013168 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"Its hard to read the Second Amendment and not honestly conclude that the Framers intended gun ownership to be an individual right."

Well yeah, as real Americans have been saying for decades to illiterate prog "constitutional scholars" everywhere.

The entirety of the original amendments is a prohibition on the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT. Nowhere in the ten does it recognize special rights or powers of the federal government.

I defy anyone to name just one.

As a matter of fact there were certain state representatives (ahem) who would not sign the constitution which outlined its limits without the amendments attached RECOGNIZING (not granting) those rights already there to states & individuals. Nothing was granted, its already there.

Meaning (for the unconvinced prog free-shit army of the perpetualy ignorant academic gnome class) there would be no federal government without those very amendments.

Next lesson, how free-shit army statists steal rights & liberty through the "commerce clause" ;-)

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 03:34 | 6013728 El Vaquero
El Vaquero's picture

nmwen, Bill or Rights or not, there will be somebody who wants to lord over you.  Can you say that we would be in a better place if there was no bill of rights?  Then 1st Amendment is under hardcore assault right now.  The 2nd has been, with losses and victories on both sides.  I'm skipping the third for the obvious reasons.  the fourth has been gutted due to the war on drugs and the war on terror.  In fact, most of what we have is either under assault or has been degraded.  We really don't follow the constitution.  The tenth is dead, dead, dead. 

 

So we have a bill of rights.  Would we be better off without it than with it?  IMO, no.  With the exception of the scant protection that the 2nd amendment provides, and it is scant, the government is going to do what the government is going to do.  I do not believe this is unique to the US either.  In the end, the only things that matter are the ability and the willingness to apply force.  Free speech?  I support it.  Say whatever the fuck you want. But we should be allowed to have a means of evading and destroying drones, attack helicopters, etc...

 

Put forth a bill of rights, and there are people who will try to find a way around it.  Put forth a system that depends on the limitation of government power, and there are people who will try to find a way around it.  Jefferson was a hypocrite, but not an idiot.  Trees.  Liberty.  Blood.  Tyrants.  Patriots.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 06:48 | 6013843 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Yes, what you say is all true, especially:

"I do not believe this is unique to the US either.  In the end, the only things that matter are the ability and the willingness to apply force."

It is not a unique feature of America. With the heady moments in the birth of nations and in the civilized effort to "live together" and apply order these things are made and solemny attested to, then promptly abridged with the injuries to the people becoming more pronounced and in your face over time.

What most people fail to see in the thing being created (a central government) is that, among its first acts will always be self-perpetuation through patronage and self-interest. Those who rightly & justly rebelled against the former law & order givers (properly called traitors & outlaws by the king & his court...lol) begin all over again in making new laws for establishing order. Of the first actions will always be laws against sedition & rebellion by the people, how appropriate, I'm sure the king understands this conundrum perfectly ;-)

This is a long way of saying, laws are like fairy tales told to children to pacify them, to allow them to sleep better at night, the white knight standing at the foot of their bed watching over them, its very soothing and comforting knowing the knight will use deadly force and kill anyone who approaches them on their behalf. But when you say this knight took by force the land, the house and the very bed the child sleeps in, it does appear to be a very different set of circumstances to the ones it was taken from.

In the end force is all that matters, not laws or regulations or the best of intentions by people who are more afraid of the cost of their own liberty than the tyrants knight standing at the foot of their bed.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 08:59 | 6014062 g speed
g speed's picture

the path to power is murder--period   

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 08:57 | 6014058 Beowulf55
Beowulf55's picture

"In the end force is all that matters"

...and that is why things must change.  Force has shown over the last 6,000 to be not the answer but the problem.  Force begets force.  It is not the solution.  It is the problem.  We must start seeing with better eyes.  We must let the system consume itself, and when it is gone then we can rebuild a new world without fear.

You might think I live in a world of unicorns that shit skittles but if you take a honest look at our world you will see people have much in common and are only seperated by govt ass holes like the Clintons, Bushes, and Cheney's of the world that want you to be their slaves. 

Stop feeding the beast, and let it starve to death.


Tue, 04/21/2015 - 11:32 | 6014631 El Vaquero
El Vaquero's picture

Starve the beast, yes, but understand that the beast can be violent and dangerous in its death throws.  Violence is a part of life.  It is something that we all need to deal with, even if we detest violence.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 01:55 | 6013667 Paveway IV
Paveway IV's picture

It's all in the subconcious marketing, nmewn. 

The state gets its powers from the people (or 'united as one') was an idea dear to the hearts of the French during their revolution. It was a nice idea, so we sort of stole it for describing our new republic. It was symbolized by fasces, a bundle of sticks bound together, as seen being held by the nice lady on the Great Seal of France

Next time you see the State of the Union address or anything from the House Chambers, notice the two faces on the wall behind the rostrum. This is a corruption of the axe-less unity faces symbol we stole from the French. In fact, faces with an axe-head are taken specifically from Rome, where they symbolized the Senator's ultimate power of life and death over their citizens, not unity. They were paraded in front of the Roman Senators when they walked around the city to shove the rabble out of their way and remind them who was boss and who could chop you head off. Roman faces were meant to be a very visible symbol of intimidation. 

Now what other nation (or, say... a caliphate) today intimidates its citizens with the threat of head-chopping if you disobey their authority?

The U.S. changed the unity faces to the axed faces around a hundred years ago or so. A not so subtle reminder that it's not about unity of citizens at all anymore - it's now about federal government power and control. Point out that that was NOT the intent of the founding fathers and axed faces are inappropriate, and you will be labeled a dangerious anti-government militia-type and the state will relieve you of your head.

I'm pretty sure John Boehner has a real one hidden somewhere and he uses it in their weekly Congressional child-sacrifice and blood-drinking rituals. Wait... maybe you're not suppose to know that part.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 00:35 | 6013563 forexskin
forexskin's picture

bravo, i'll only add the enabling clause permitting the 'necessary and proper' actions to implement... (section 8, clause 18)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_Proper_Clause

 

Mon, 04/20/2015 - 20:38 | 6012997 Nobody For President
Nobody For President's picture

Once upon a time, I took an oath "...to defend my country from all, enemies, foreign and domestic..."

ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC...

It has taken more than 50 years to finally understand that.

Damn, it is pitifull what my country has become. 

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 01:14 | 6013621 BullyBearish
BullyBearish's picture

If so many of those that took the oath, followed the oath...we'd have a jubilee of suicides and a traitor-free country

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 00:20 | 6013549 Prober
Prober's picture

"Damn, it is pitifull what my country has become. "

Many years ago, along the path of usurpation and decline, the USA of the Founders was taken away from us, ie it is no longer OUR country, we just happen to be leftovers stuck living in the old place under new management.

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 03:13 | 6013710 El Vaquero
El Vaquero's picture

I would upvote, but you talk about usurpation and decline, yet you go on and promulgate the propaganda that is part of that usurpation and decline.  You are either a skillful troll, or you are still in the matrix. 

Tue, 04/21/2015 - 00:29 | 6013562 forexskin
forexskin's picture

hard to put an exact date to it - 1861 - 1865 - 1871 - 1913 - 1934 - 1963 - 1971 - 2001

we are the incrementally boiled frog, with the banksters hand's on the stove's knob.

god help us...

Mon, 04/20/2015 - 20:27 | 6012944 failsafe
failsafe's picture

and thanks for reminding us that things can change and what is at stake sometimes without our realizing it

so thumbs up on the post GW ...dont always agree but appreciate that you make people think

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!