Connecting Singles^® Forums100% Free Online Dating

Amendment II (the Second Amendment) of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights declares a well-regulated militia as "being necessary to the security of a free State" and prohibits infringement of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."


Should we us this right as a union to rid the enemies of our own unoin such as our own president ..etc to eradicate the corruptiona and send a message WE ARE THE PEOPLE?

It was actually intended for just that purpose.

I honestly think that it could happen the more America learns more and more about it's leaders behavior. If we are to retain who we are we must send a message.

That IS the intention of that ammendment, Montana among other states have legislation threatening to secede. (I did this on another thread, but I think it's gone now)

BUT....Overthrowing the government using the 2nd ammendment would NEVER work. I have a bunch of guns, but I don't own a tank. We as citizems aren't armed well enough. And the ban on assult rifles makes that fact worse for the people. I have one, but I couldn't defend myself against a full platoon of soldiers.

THEY know what they're doing every time the pass statutes banning types of guns and ammunition.

This government has sold out it's own people and surrounds itself with security. They only have so much. I charge this government with TREASON! Where are the people's rights here. People like this need to be dealt with. If that is the only course than I say we take our second amendments right to heart! I know it sounds crazy but what other recourse do we have and afterall it is our rights and has to do with protecting our livelyhoods...

I found that thread and my origional post:





Lakota Indians secede from the U.S. (Lakota Website)

According to Russell Means, an Indian rights activist, the treaties signed with the U.S. are merely "worthless words on worthless paper" and have been repeatedl violated in order to steal out culture, our land, and our ability to maintain our way of life.

Lakota country includes parts of Nebraska, S.Dakota, N.Dakota, Wyoming, and MONTANA.

Speaking of Montana, I've been following this laely. Now I don't live there, but the state I DO live in one that is mentioned.

Secy of state Brad Johnson of Montant delivered a letter to the Washington times about a possible secession of the state depending on the outcome of the U.S. v Heller case currently in front of the Supreme court.

The Us Supreme court will decide D.C. v Heler, the first case in more than 60 yrs in ehich the court will confront the meaning of the 2nd ammendment to the US constitution. Although Heller is about the constitutionality of the D.C. handgun ban, the court's decision will have impact far beyond the district of columbia.

The court must decide in Heller whether the 2nd Ammendment secures a rght for INDIVIDUALS to keep and bear arms, or merely grants states to arm their militias, (national guard). The latter view is called the "collective rights" theory.

A collective rights decision by the court would violate the contract by which Montana entered into statehood, called the Compact with the United States and archived at Article I of the Montana Constitution. When Montana and the US entered into this bilateral contract in 1889, the U.S. approved the right to bear arms in the Montana constitution, guaranteeing the right of "any person" to bear arms, clearly an individual right.

There was NO assertion in 1889 tha the 2nd ammendment was susceptible to a "collective rights" interpretation, and the parties to the contract understood the 2nd ammendment to be consistant with the declared Montana Constitutional right of "any person" to bear arms.

As a bedrock principle of law, a contract must be honred so as to give effect to the intent of the contracting parties. A collective rights decision by the court in Heller would invoke an era a unilaterally revisable contracts by violating the statehood contract between the US and Montana as well as other states such as Idaho, Pennsylvania, Ohio, N. Carolina, Alabama, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Georgia.

Numerous Montana lawmakers have concurred in a resolution raising this contract violation issue. It is posted at progunleaders.org. The US would do well to keep its contractual promise to the states that the 2nd Ammendment secures an individual right now as it did upon execution of the statehood contract.

Some Texans have joined the Montana bandwagon due to the recent theft of privately owned farm land taken for the construction of the Texas Corridor.

WELL, I see the sewcond amendment as a right to bear arms to protect your country. What people are getting away with and being able to secure armed security to do so should allow people to respond. They are armed lie a military and waging war against the people.

They should make streaking a right..

I see that as an "art". Freedom of Expression?????

I say they should make obvious traitors a target and bombard them We send troops to other countries to kill them for undetermined reasons and these war pigs get off smelling like a rose. They have a more clear cut reasons for exterminating them..LOL


I say.. PEOPLE TAKE YOUR COUNTRY BACK!

Amendment II (the Second Amendment) of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights declares a well-regulated militia as "being necessary to the security of a free State"

Sounds like it applies!!

If we consider the voting rates of the US (About 60% for 2000 & 62% for 2004) It would seem we could move the country more effectively if we got off our butts and voted and I think this was proven during the 2006 elections.

I agree with your views on the 2nd ammendment (we should have the right to bear arms) However, if we have collectively ingored by large the other tools we have available to make change then we are no better then the "war pigs" we would raise arm against.

JMO

The sad part is that the traitors in our country are protected by secret service. It would take a militia to overcome them. I say. That would be a greater effort that being over in Iraq.

When i am writing my Book about the New, New world order, can i quote you on this as an opening to how the revolution started?

There is usually a thread like this running on the site. Just what is it that provokes such a strong reaction from Americans against the US government? When people are talking about taking up arms against the state, it must be fairly serious.

Ya think???

Yer darn right it's serious!!!

It's absolutely time for Americans to present arms, round up the Treasoners and declare WAR to Take America Back...

To return the government to its People!!!

I am with you 100% Lionhearted... Enough is Enough!!!!!

***note***OP author is in Canada.

Didn't notice that before........

UR a con Nut Why r u worry so much about the US ???????????????

It'll never work. Martial law would march over everyone who resists.

This isn't the revolutionary war times. Back then we all had the same weapons and tactics for the most part.

My AR-15 is NOT going to stop 500 soldiers from overrunning my property.

Just won't happen. I'll sit in the mountains and wait for Nibiru.