JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Freedom of speech is a tool that the left uses to control those that try to fight them on any issue and have been doing so actively .
Nearly all censorship comes from the left and very seldom if ever from the right.
That is just a fact of who they are.
Control speech control minds and you control people.
PC is the biggest and most dangerous weapon that has come along in a century and they use it to the maximum.
Now they will try to control your speech on firearms issues get angry if you call them out on it.
It is one things that makes them most angry when you expose them on it.

Openly they have not been too successful on it but in education, news media, and on many forums they have been very successful and it has transformed our country into a cesspool of left wing dominated politics and destructive to the Constitution. PC is also the means that they control others speech about anything they do not want discussed openly.

One example is in education, and the fact if your child utters the word gun or anything related they will risk being suspended and or expelled. And the utterance of anything political that the left does not want discussed can and has caused the same result. That carries foreward to many other aspects of life also.
Censorship rears its ugly head in far too many places nowadays.

ULTIMATELY it will be the 2nd that ends up saving the first for that simple reason.
.

Good example is the two nitwits from Black Lies Matter that pushed Bernie Sanders off the mic two weeks ago. Here is a guy that's supposed to be on their side, a progressive that stands for their rights (or so they tell us) and they use the same tactic used on us - shout him down. No reason. No polite request. Just shout him down and get out of their damn way. Say anything in response, and you're a damn racist! Shut your mouth!!!

I have to admit the whole situation had me laughing though - they deserve getting back what they've created. I hope they all implode on each other.
 
Freedom of speech in the United States is considered the Holy Grail of constitutional rights and protected by most people. 2nd amendment is not considered necessary anymore by many people. They do not believe or understand how the 1st is protected by the 2nd amendment. Shouting fire in a crowded theater would be an illegal "use" of freedom of speech similar to what I was discussing previously in this thread on the misuse of firearms.
Freedom of speech is a tool that the left uses to control those that try to fight them on any issue and have been doing so actively .
Nearly all censorship comes from the left and very seldom if ever from the right.
That is just a fact of who they are.
Control speech control minds and you control people.
PC is the biggest and most dangerous weapon that has come along in a century and they use it to the maximum.
Now they will try to control your speech on firearms issues get angry if you call them out on it.
It is one things that makes them most angry when you expose them on it.

Openly they have not been too successful on it but in education, news media, and on many forums they have been very successful and it has transformed our country into a cesspool of left wing dominated politics and destructive to the Constitution. PC is also the means that they control others speech about anything they do not want discussed openly.

One example is in education, and the fact if your child utters the word gun or anything related they will risk being suspended and or expelled. And the utterance of anything political that the left does not want discussed can and has caused the same result. That carries foreward to many other aspects of life also.
Censorship rears its ugly head in far too many places nowadays.

ULTIMATELY it will be the 2nd that ends up saving the first for that simple reason.
.

Does that mean that it's permissible to discuss some of the good things the left has done when someone is here or bad things the right has done? I'm not a die hard liberal but I feel anyone with liberal ideals maybe hestitant to post within this website.
 
When I grew up, shooting real guns was truly exciting - but there were no video games that allowed you to shoot all sorts of weapons and calibers at reactive targets with little or no restrictions on safety or otherwise. No judgement here, just observations.

Part of being outside is primal for most any of us, I think when a person resides and stays inside they begin to lose what makes us human. I have a flip cell phone, not because I cant afford a smart phone I simply see them for people whom have no imagination and are ignorant to what life is about. Might offend some but reality is people got along just fine without smart phones now days no one meets and talks they just text and message. The idea of spending time shooting is getting in touch with others and building a bond and knowledge base. When I was a kid we would grab out rifles strap them to the handle bars and be gone all day long. That was a adventure, that was real life. By the time I was an adult I knew more about survival then the average man or women in their 3o's today. The point is we are raising techo-babies that will be oblivious to how to survive if SHTF. I am happy that not all young people are techo-babies. But we need to be careful the more we rely on technology the more we will have to battle with to survive if it ever vanished.
 
Does that mean that it's permissible to discuss some of the good things the left has done when someone is here or bad things the right has done? I'm not a die hard liberal but I feel anyone with liberal ideals maybe hestitant to post within this website.

There are a number of folks with liberal ideals on this site, some more die hard than others. The site is open to anyone, of any persuasion, as per Joe's direction and rules.

I don't think it's necessarily all liberal ideals that turn some of the most conservative off, but the constant and relentless attack on gun rights (as well as a few other rights) that have been 100% led and forced by liberal politicians. In Oregon, SB941 was 100% the responsibility of the Democrat party. They ignored us, lied to us and stripped us of our rights. And, as would be expected, people are pissed.

So, I would say anyone should be open to post, but if you sense some hostility, that's likely why, not necessarily because you may support certain social programs, etc. It would be nice if you folks could convince the lawmakers on your side to leave our gun rights alone, it might make for a more friendly environment. But for now, as it stands, there is a very clear line of attack on our gun rights, and it's coming only from one side of the political spectrum.
 
Does that mean that it's permissible to discuss some of the good things the left has done when someone is here or bad things the right has done? I'm not a die hard liberal but I feel anyone with liberal ideals maybe hestitant to post within this website.

Well if you say anything non-conservative, Taku will just "ignore" you anyway... so I guess that's his own personal form of ironic censorship.

I have no problem posting my liberal ideals here, because I am used to not fitting in anywhere and having people mob on everything I say. I post on liberal boards and get banned for my "conservative" or Christian ideals (that censorship Taku speaks of... oh snap!). I post here and get mobbed on a little, but at least Joe has tried to cultivate a culture of tolerance of all ideals. So while the majority would love to see me banned - many, like Taku have even said so - leadership won't go there. At least for as long as I'm too apathetic to really argue my points.

Most of the time it just isn't worth the effort. And that's the effect you speak of, I think... it's not that liberals are afraid or inhibited posting here, it's just that they have no interest in doing so. Why post when you're just gonna be hammered by a super majority of opposition and arguing constantly?

I just happen to like a little arguing. I am, afterall an apologist. And the "type" to be. We have a type. (not)
 
Liberals are generally super ignorant on guns, not anti-gun. They don't actually really care any more than anyone else. I say this as someone who is and associates with liberals. I debate guns with my friends.... what I get us "well I just don't want criminals and lunatics having them, so I'm ok with a _______ regulations." I'll counter with some logic, won't get any kind of intelligent response..... generally something like "well I just don't see what the big deals is." It's just ignorance. Not hatred, not passion, and if they stopped watching the news, they'd probably really have no opinion on guns.

"Liberals" are not your enemy. If some of the biggest bubblegumers spent as much time calmly educating as bubbleguming, a LOT of these non-gun liberals could be effectively converted.
 
Liberals are generally super ignorant on guns, not anti-gun. They don't actually really care any more than anyone else. I say this as someone who is and associates with liberals. I debate guns with my friends.... what I get us "well I just don't want criminals and lunatics having them, so I'm ok with a _______ regulations." I'll counter with some logic, won't get any kind of intelligent response..... generally something like "well I just don't see what the big deals is." It's just ignorance. Not hatred, not passion, and if they stopped watching the news, they'd probably really have no opinion on guns.

"Liberals" are not your enemy. If some of the biggest bubblegumers spent as much time calmly educating as bubbleguming, a LOT of these non-gun liberals could be effectively converted.

I've spoken to some liberal gun owners that have told me they are completely ignored by their own party and by other liberals. At the same time, I see so-called conservatives that claim to be on our side and yet work against us by either remaining silent on the issue, or even, in a few cases, working with the anti-gun side to bring about 'compromise', which usually means we give up some rights so the other side can feel better.

I have no problem with liberals in general. I know a lot. Most of my family is liberal - so I am the outcast among them. But some of the policies and political tactics they push are just too far overreaching for me, and that does get my ire up from time to time ;) And yes, I'm also aware of the dirty politics played by folks on my side too.

I think we can all agree, regardless of party affiliation, that politicians are generally just bad news.
 
I think we can all agree, regardless of party affiliation, that politicians are generally just bad news.

Seems that sadly there just as many conservatives that are bad for gun rights as there are liberals. The premise is easy to see but for some reason escapes me that Liberal now means Democrat. And Conservative mean Republicans which is a crock of horse dung to be frank.

I actually do not have a party favorite, as I belong to "NONE".
I know many Libetarians that are very pro-gun that get lumped into being a liberal which equals in many a eye Democrat. I also know some many Conservative that are very pro-Constitution and pro-gun, pro-samesex marriage and pro-Cannabis.
Today there is so much missmash of believes that one can float around allot on what one believes. I am guilty as well using the word liberal to mean really Democrat, which is also not fair as I also know several pro-gun Democrats that not only Conceal Carry they own gun stores. I therefore agree every existing party can not be trusted and in my opinion no one should ever just vote party line just cause they belong to a particular one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've spoken to some liberal gun owners that have told me they are completely ignored by their own party and by other liberals. At the same time, I see so-called conservatives that claim to be on our side and yet work against us by either remaining silent on the issue, or even, in a few cases, working with the anti-gun side to bring about 'compromise', which usually means we give up some rights so the other side can feel better.

I have no problem with liberals in general. I know a lot. Most of my family is liberal - so I am the outcast among them. But some of the policies and political tactics they push are just too far overreaching for me, and that does get my ire up from time to time ;) And yes, I'm also aware of the dirty politics played by folks on my side too.

I think we can all agree, regardless of party affiliation, that politicians are generally just bad news.

I'm right there with you:cool:
 
There are a number of folks with liberal ideals on this site, some more die hard than others. The site is open to anyone, of any persuasion, as per Joe's direction and rules.

I don't think it's necessarily all liberal ideals that turn some of the most conservative off, but the constant and relentless attack on gun rights (as well as a few other rights) that have been 100% led and forced by liberal politicians. In Oregon, SB941 was 100% the responsibility of the Democrat party. They ignored us, lied to us and stripped us of our rights. And, as would be expected, people are pissed.

So, I would say anyone should be open to post, but if you sense some hostility, that's likely why, not necessarily because you may support certain social programs, etc. It would be nice if you folks could convince the lawmakers on your side to leave our gun rights alone, it might make for a more friendly environment. But for now, as it stands, there is a very clear line of attack on our gun rights, and it's coming only from one side of the political spectrum.

We were forewarned of this a long time ago. Now it has come to the destruction of the 2nd Amendment. The one amendment that is in place to ensure the survival of the Constitution.

But it was forewarned. A good example of that.

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward.
reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement to vwww.AmericanMinute.com

"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it..."-Judge Learned Hand
6697.jpg
"A conservative among liberals, and a liberal among conservatives,"
he was not consistently conservative enough for Republican President Warren G. Harding and he was not consistently liberal enough for Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt.

As a result, he was passed over several times to be a nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.

ae420bc7-c1c4-4e7a-896d-496220caaf12.jpg

His name was Learned Hand, who served as a judge for over 50 years, first on New York's District Court, then on the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Judge Learned Hand's legal decisions were so respected they were referenced in U.S. Supreme Court Cases.



Though a political progressive, he was an advocate of judicial restraint, stating he could not "frame any definition that will explain when the Court will assume the role of a third legislative chamber and when it will limit its authority. "

23f3fe2e-e4f5-4469-8142-729bf2a17d7e.jpg

In 1934, Judge Hand ruled in United States v. Schechter Poultry that Franklin Roosevelt's "New Deal" Federal law did not apply to a poultry firm which operated only within the State of New York.

2235047f-d0fd-49d4-a46c-b02cf0dabcf1.jpg

In 1937, Judge Learned Hand condemned Franklin Roosevelt's attempt to pack the Supreme Court with as many as 15 justices in order to get the Court's approval of his power usurping big government programs.

11695.jpg

Writing to Justice Felix Frankfurter, March 24, 1945, Judge Learned Hand warned:

"I confess it seems to me that we are pretty plainly headed for some fairly comprehensive collectivist ordering of industry; people don't want it...

Can you have a collectivist democracy? The future has all sorts of creatures in its womb...

There seems to me great obstacles; a society in which the individual's fate is completely in the hands of the government can scarcely manifest itself as a succession of resultants of 'pressure groups' - it won't stand up."

11694.jpg

Judge Learned Hand, who was nicknamed 'the tenth Justice of the Supreme Court', died AUGUST 18, 1961.

11691.jpg


In Gregory v. Helvering (2d Cir. 1934), Judge Learned Hand wrote:

"Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury.

There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes... Nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands."

d46a7a1b-3941-4668-a484-4f9d89a097b8.jpg

In Dennis v. United States (I83 F.2d 20I, 2I3, 2d Cir. 1950), a plurality of Supreme Court Justices adopted Judge Learned Hand's view that Eugene Dennis, General Secretary of the Communist Party USA, did not have a First Amendment right to free speech if his goal in organizing protestors was to overthrow the Constitution and set up a government which would not allow free speech.

3303.jpg

In agreement, Dwight Eisenhower stated in the TIME Magazine article, "Eisenhower on Communism," October 13, 1952:

"The Bill of Rights contains no grant of privilege for a group of people to destroy the Bill of Rights.

A group - like the Communist conspiracy - dedicated to the ultimate destruction of all civil liberties, cannot be allowed to claim civil liberties as its privileged sanctuary from which to carry on subversion of the Government."

378c50bc-4d0e-4bfd-859e-aaac634f434b.jpg
This interpretation may be applied to those wanting to subvert the Constitution to establish totalitarian Islamic Sharia Law.


8d1917d4-d84c-4632-b324-2fc45c4f5f50.jpg

Comparing Communism with Islam, Judge Learned Hand wrote in the decision:

"By far the most powerful of all the European nations (Russia) had been a convert to Communism for over thirty years; its leaders were the most devoted and potent proponents of the faith; no such movement in Europe of East to West had arisen since Islam."

6698.jpg

Judge Learned Hand commented on the danger of allowing political correctness to intimidate people from voicing their opinions for fear of it being labeled "hate speech":

"That community is already in the process of dissolution...where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our conviction in the open."



Two weeks before the D-Day invasion in the last year of World War II, Judge Learned Hand was catapulted to national prominence when he gave a speech to the largest crowd ever assembled in New York City to that date.


679d17a8-8e63-445a-a7f1-8f0b92d65aba.jpg
Nearly one and a half million met in Central Park, May 21, 1944, for the annual "I Am an American Day," including 150,000 newly naturalized citizens about to make their oath of allegiance to the United States.

11692.jpg

To become a United States citizen, the Oath required after 1929 that immigrants swear:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;

that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;

that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law (added 1950);

that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law (added 1950);

that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law (added 1952);

and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

11690.jpg

After comments by Mayor LaGuardia, Senator Wagner and clergymen of Protestant, Catholic and Jewish faiths, Judge Learned Hand gave his short speech, 'The Spirit of Liberty,' May 21, 1944, which was reprinted in The New Yorker, The New York Times, Life Magazine and Readers Digest.

11689.jpg

Judge Learned Hand stated:

"We have gathered here to affirm a faith, a faith in a common purpose, a common conviction, a common devotion.

Some of us have chosen America as the land of our adoption; the rest have come from those who did the same...

We sought liberty; freedom from oppression, freedom from want, freedom to be ourselves..."

93a56818-0d92-415a-a906-1129e052fc09.jpg

Judge Hand continued:

"I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes; believe me, these are false hopes.

Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it...

And what is this liberty which must lie in the hearts of men and women?

It is not the ruthless, the unbridled will; it is not freedom to do as one likes. That is the denial of liberty, and leads straight to its overthrow.

A society in which men recognize no check upon their freedom soon becomes a society where freedom is the possession of only a savage few; as we have learned to our sorrow..."

0824c9fd-136b-4530-98df-12253993df0e.jpg

Judge Hand added:

"What then is the spirit of liberty?

I cannot define it; I can only tell you my own faith.

The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right;

the spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understand the mind of other men and women;

the spirit of liberty is the spirit which weighs their interests alongside its own without bias;

the spirit of liberty remembers that not even a sparrow falls to earth unheeded;

the spirit of liberty is the spirit of Him who, near two thousand years ago, taught mankind that lesson it has never learned but never quite forgotten; that there may be a kingdom where the least shall be heard and considered side by side with the greatest."



Judge Learned Hand ended, after which he led everyone in the Pledge of Allegiance:

"In the spirit of that America which lies hidden in some form in the aspirations of us all;

in the spirit of that America for which our young men are at this moment fighting and dying;

in that spirit of liberty and of America I ask you to rise and with me pledge our faith in the glorious destiny of our beloved country."
2add7ebe-2f9f-49ea-be55-949afcd1a713.jpg

Judge Learned Hand's speech echoed an earlier view from noted British writer G.K. Chesterton, who penned in "What is America" (What I Saw In America, 1922):

"America is the ONLY NATION IN THE WORLD that is founded on creed.

That creed is set forth...in the Declaration of Independence...that all men are equal in their claim to justice, that governments exist to give them that justice...

It certainly does condemn...atheism, since it clearly names the CREATOR as the ultimate authority from whom these equal rights are derived."

11696.jpg

Judge Learned Hand wrote:

"The use of history is to tell us...past themes, else we should have to repeat, each in his own experience, the successes and the failures of our forebears."




American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward.
reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement to vwww.AmericanMinute.com
 
We were forewarned of this a long time ago. Now it has come to the destruction of the 2nd Amendment. The one amendment that is in place to ensure the survival of the Constitution.

But it was forewarned. A good example of that.

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward.
reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement to vwww.AmericanMinute.com

"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it..."-Judge Learned Hand
"A conservative among liberals, and a liberal among conservatives,"
he was not consistently conservative enough for Republican President Warren G. Harding and he was not consistently liberal enough for Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt.

As a result, he was passed over several times to be a nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.


His name was Learned Hand, who served as a judge for over 50 years, first on New York's District Court, then on the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Judge Learned Hand's legal decisions were so respected they were referenced in U.S. Supreme Court Cases.



Though a political progressive, he was an advocate of judicial restraint, stating he could not "frame any definition that will explain when the Court will assume the role of a third legislative chamber and when it will limit its authority. "


In 1934, Judge Hand ruled in United States v. Schechter Poultry that Franklin Roosevelt's "New Deal" Federal law did not apply to a poultry firm which operated only within the State of New York.


In 1937, Judge Learned Hand condemned Franklin Roosevelt's attempt to pack the Supreme Court with as many as 15 justices in order to get the Court's approval of his power usurping big government programs.


Writing to Justice Felix Frankfurter, March 24, 1945, Judge Learned Hand warned:

"I confess it seems to me that we are pretty plainly headed for some fairly comprehensive collectivist ordering of industry; people don't want it...

Can you have a collectivist democracy? The future has all sorts of creatures in its womb...

There seems to me great obstacles; a society in which the individual's fate is completely in the hands of the government can scarcely manifest itself as a succession of resultants of 'pressure groups' - it won't stand up."


Judge Learned Hand, who was nicknamed 'the tenth Justice of the Supreme Court', died AUGUST 18, 1961.



In Gregory v. Helvering (2d Cir. 1934), Judge Learned Hand wrote:

"Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury.

There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes... Nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands."


In Dennis v. United States (I83 F.2d 20I, 2I3, 2d Cir. 1950), a plurality of Supreme Court Justices adopted Judge Learned Hand's view that Eugene Dennis, General Secretary of the Communist Party USA, did not have a First Amendment right to free speech if his goal in organizing protestors was to overthrow the Constitution and set up a government which would not allow free speech.


In agreement, Dwight Eisenhower stated in the TIME Magazine article, "Eisenhower on Communism," October 13, 1952:

"The Bill of Rights contains no grant of privilege for a group of people to destroy the Bill of Rights.

A group - like the Communist conspiracy - dedicated to the ultimate destruction of all civil liberties, cannot be allowed to claim civil liberties as its privileged sanctuary from which to carry on subversion of the Government."

This interpretation may be applied to those wanting to subvert the Constitution to establish totalitarian Islamic Sharia Law.



Comparing Communism with Islam, Judge Learned Hand wrote in the decision:

"By far the most powerful of all the European nations (Russia) had been a convert to Communism for over thirty years; its leaders were the most devoted and potent proponents of the faith; no such movement in Europe of East to West had arisen since Islam."


Judge Learned Hand commented on the danger of allowing political correctness to intimidate people from voicing their opinions for fear of it being labeled "hate speech":

"That community is already in the process of dissolution...where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our conviction in the open."



Two weeks before the D-Day invasion in the last year of World War II, Judge Learned Hand was catapulted to national prominence when he gave a speech to the largest crowd ever assembled in New York City to that date.


Nearly one and a half million met in Central Park, May 21, 1944, for the annual "I Am an American Day," including 150,000 newly naturalized citizens about to make their oath of allegiance to the United States.


To become a United States citizen, the Oath required after 1929 that immigrants swear:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;

that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;

that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law (added 1950);

that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law (added 1950);

that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law (added 1952);

and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."


After comments by Mayor LaGuardia, Senator Wagner and clergymen of Protestant, Catholic and Jewish faiths, Judge Learned Hand gave his short speech, 'The Spirit of Liberty,' May 21, 1944, which was reprinted in The New Yorker, The New York Times, Life Magazine and Readers Digest.


Judge Learned Hand stated:

"We have gathered here to affirm a faith, a faith in a common purpose, a common conviction, a common devotion.

Some of us have chosen America as the land of our adoption; the rest have come from those who did the same...

We sought liberty; freedom from oppression, freedom from want, freedom to be ourselves..."


Judge Hand continued:

"I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes; believe me, these are false hopes.

Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it...

And what is this liberty which must lie in the hearts of men and women?

It is not the ruthless, the unbridled will; it is not freedom to do as one likes. That is the denial of liberty, and leads straight to its overthrow.

A society in which men recognize no check upon their freedom soon becomes a society where freedom is the possession of only a savage few; as we have learned to our sorrow..."


Judge Hand added:

"What then is the spirit of liberty?

I cannot define it; I can only tell you my own faith.

The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right;

the spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understand the mind of other men and women;

the spirit of liberty is the spirit which weighs their interests alongside its own without bias;

the spirit of liberty remembers that not even a sparrow falls to earth unheeded;

the spirit of liberty is the spirit of Him who, near two thousand years ago, taught mankind that lesson it has never learned but never quite forgotten; that there may be a kingdom where the least shall be heard and considered side by side with the greatest."



Judge Learned Hand ended, after which he led everyone in the Pledge of Allegiance:

"In the spirit of that America which lies hidden in some form in the aspirations of us all;

in the spirit of that America for which our young men are at this moment fighting and dying;

in that spirit of liberty and of America I ask you to rise and with me pledge our faith in the glorious destiny of our beloved country."

Judge Learned Hand's speech echoed an earlier view from noted British writer G.K. Chesterton, who penned in "What is America" (What I Saw In America, 1922):

"America is the ONLY NATION IN THE WORLD that is founded on creed.

That creed is set forth...in the Declaration of Independence...that all men are equal in their claim to justice, that governments exist to give them that justice...

It certainly does condemn...atheism, since it clearly names the CREATOR as the ultimate authority from whom these equal rights are derived."


Judge Learned Hand wrote:

"The use of history is to tell us...past themes, else we should have to repeat, each in his own experience, the successes and the failures of our forebears."




American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward.
reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement to vwww.AmericanMinute.com

Judge Hand is not someone who is known to me, but he looks like someone I need to read more about. From what you posted here, it sounds like he's right up my alley. Sad to see he was prophetic too.
 
Judge Hand is not someone who is known to me, but he looks like someone I need to read more about. From what you posted here, it sounds like he's right up my alley. Sad to see he was prophetic too.

A lot of truth in the history there just the same.
The evidence of it was evident in both Oregon and Washington this last year.
We and the Constitution are under attack and it won't quit.
Now Obama is trying to incorporate registration is his version of an "Arms Treaty" although not constitutional methods that does not seem to stop him and no one else is either.
 
Last Edited:
We and the Constitution are under attack and it won't quit

100% agree. And, unfortunately, many of the people we elect to protect it are falling down on the job, turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to many of those attacks :( It makes me wonder what we little people can ever hope to do to stop them.
 
100% agree. And, unfortunately, many of the people we elect to protect it are falling down on the job, turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to many of those attacks :( It makes me wonder what we little people can ever hope to do to stop them.

When they only allow their own voice we cannot ever win this.
They own the MSM and nearly every other news media as well.
If they don't own it they control it. They demonize all that criticize them.
McCarthy pretty much hit it all dead center. He was silenced also.
The Communists demonized him and still do.
Its how they roll. :mad: They have demonized guns in every direction and
put your children right in the middle of it.
So they will grow up to be their new ANTI constitution army.

Some, just some are fighting back, but too few too late I am afraid.
http://www.wnd.com/2015/08/congressman-spanks-colleges-for-censoring-students/
 
Last Edited:
McCarthy was a sonuvabubblegum who tried to usurp power through fear, extortion, and intimidation. One of the worst and most embarrassing political figures this country has ever seen.
 
100% agree. And, unfortunately, many of the people we elect to protect it are falling down on the job, turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to many of those attacks :( It makes me wonder what we little people can ever hope to do to stop them.

What we can do , is educate those we know. In how we act, how we love and how we hate.
I am not a huge fan of lobbies even though I am a lifer. I see that way too long we have listen to lobbyist and watch them preech to the choir. The Left is educating in full swing with lies and drummed up factoids. If we do nothing to educate would be gun owners the left will.
 
What we can do , is educate those we know. In how we act, how we love and how we hate.
I am not a huge fan of lobbies even though I am a lifer. I see that way too long we have listen to lobbyist and watch them preech to the choir. The Left is educating in full swing with lies and drummed up factoids. If we do nothing to educate would be gun owners the left will.

You are right, education is key. Those of us with children have an obligation, a duty, to bring them up with an appreciation of what this country has historically stood for. To teach them about what we're losing and what we have yet to lose. To encourage them to vote, and to be smart in their voting. To stand up and take charge when the opportunity arises.

Our daughter is home schooled for this very reason. We are part of 3 different home school coops that she attends each week. We interact with a lot of different families each week. I can say that the kids coming up in this way will be the future leaders we can find some hope in. They are learning things about the greatness of this country, about freedom and personal liberty, about the great developments and contributions we've made and the principals this country was founded on - all things that the public school system has abandoned.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top