Thanks a lot James Yeager

[BillB1960]

We are not "granted" our inalienable rights by the government. The Constitution does not grant those rights either. The Constitution RECOGNIZES those rights as inherent in our creation, and specifically enumerates them. As stated in the Declaration of Independence, they are given to us "by [our] Maker". No government can revoke them. That is what the 2nd Amendment is about...preserving a means to keep those rights from being violated.

If our rights are "inalienable" then how about you arm up and head down to Mexico and see how far you get before you get thrown in prison for possessing firearms. Go ahead and scream all you want about "inalienable rights" and then let us know if Mexican prisons are as bad as they say they are.

Our rights are based on the fact that we are American citizens. They go exactly as far as the borders of this country and no further. Why? Because they are granted by the Constitution of the United States and mean exactly squat outside of our national boundaries.

 

[WhyteCheddar]

There is nothing in the Declaration of Independence about the right to keep and bear arms. It also does not claim independence away from any government only government which denies Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. It goes on to state:



So again, here we have another example of government granting us certain rights in this case based on another document called the Constitution.

Read that bill again. It clearly states that those rights are given to man by 'the Creator'. I believe that is the point he is making. The framers had their personal ideologies regarding the 'Creator' but they did put on paper that they believed our rights were ours because of divine intent however you want to define that.
The point being that the paper document is a direct reflection of who the framers believed bestowed those rights on us. They intended for Government to be the defenders of those rights inasmuch. Hence the oath of office to defend that piece of paper.

 

[chariot13]

If our rights are "inalienable" then how about you arm up and head down to Mexico and see how far you get before you get thrown in prison for possessing firearms. Go ahead and scream all you want about "inalienable rights" and then let us know if Mexican prisons are as bad as they say they are.

Our rights are based on the fact that we are American citizens. They go exactly as far as the borders of this country and no further. Why? Because they are granted by the Constitution of the United States and mean exactly squat outside of our national boundaries.

You obviously have never been down to mexico. You can do any crime you want and pay off the cop or cops that show up, thats what the cop tells you to do 'or else'. I've had to pay em off before for their made up crimes only i didn't have to use US dollars. I had jus gotten back from the middle east and showed them all I had was Dinars in my wallet (of course i didn't carry my cash there), they were more than happy to accept the Dinars because they had never seen them before + i told them they were worth 3 times the amount of a US dollar because of all the oil over there. They believed me and i went back to coronado.

Moral of the story is i was as free there in mexico as here in america or anywhere else. Instead of paying the overly inflated ego of a court system with a fine like you sometimes do here, i just payed the dummy at the scene. Case closed.

 

[BillB1960]

Read that bill again. It clearly states that those rights are given to man by 'the Creator'. I believe that is the point he is making. The framers had their personal ideologies regarding the 'Creator' but they did put on paper that they believed our rights were ours because of divine intent however you want to define that.
The point being that the paper document is a direct reflection of who the framers believed bestowed those rights on us. They intended for Government to be the defenders of those rights inasmuch. Hence the oath of office to defend that piece of paper.

I think you're confusing the Declaration of Independence with the Constitution. Two different documents, 2 different purposes. The only rights mentioned in the Declaration are "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness". The Declaration does not carry the weight of law; the SCOTUS does not take cases based on their adherence to the principals of the Declaration, they take cases based on their adherence to the Constitution. Public officials and the military do not take oaths to defend the Declaration they take oaths to defend the Constitution.

 

[chariot13]

If our rights are "inalienable" then how about you arm up and head down to Mexico and see how far you get before you get thrown in prison for possessing firearms. Go ahead and scream all you want about "inalienable rights" and then let us know if Mexican prisons are as bad as they say they are.

Our rights are based on the fact that we are American citizens. They go exactly as far as the borders of this country and no further. Why? Because they are granted by the Constitution of the United States and mean exactly squat outside of our national boundaries.

There is also a status of forces agreement (sofa) with many country's. I was given a card that listed some of my basic rights and privileges that one carries with them from their home country to the host country. Yes its just a written & verbal agreement, it only gets honored if the person that can do you harm wants to honor it. No differently than if the president wants to honor the constitution. Yes he is supposed to but that doesn't mean he cant make an (unlawful) executive order that will take months and possibly years to repeal all the while he had trampled on people by registering/confiscating their guns. Best thing to do is ignore the government when they suggest they can lawfully do you wrong.

 

[BillB1960]

You obviously have never been down to mexico. You can do any crime you want and pay off the cop or cops that show up, thats what the cop tells you to do 'or else'. I've had to pay em off before for their made up crimes only i didn't have to use US dollars. I had jus gotten back from the middle east and showed them all I had was Dinars in my wallet (of course i didn't carry my cash there), they were more than happy to accept the Dinars because they had never seen them before + i told them they were worth 3 times the amount of a US dollar because of all the oil over there. They believed me and i went back to coronado.

Moral of the story is i was as free there in mexico as here in america or anywhere else. Instead of paying the overly inflated ego of a court system with a fine like you sometimes do here, i just payed the dummy at the scene. Case closed.

Please stop...for your own sake, all you're doing is making yourself look silly. You clearly can't stay on topic and you're completely missing the point.

I'm a huge fan of the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment but I'm under no illusions as to how or why it exists just like I'm under no illusions that the current group of gun grabbers in charge of our government are trying to violate it.

 

[BillB1960]

There is also a status of forces agreement (sofa) with many country's. I was given a card that listed some of my basic rights and privileges that one carries with them from their home country to the host country. Yes its just a written & verbal agreement, it only gets honored if the person that can do you harm wants to honor it. No differently than if the president wants to honor the constitution. Yes he is supposed to but that doesn't mean he cant make an (unlawful) executive order that will take months and possibly years to repeal all the while he had trampled on people by registering/confiscating their guns. Best thing to do is ignore the government when they suggest they can lawfully do you wrong.

A SOFA applies to military forces not civilians. Again, your points are completely immaterial and irrelevant.

 

[chariot13]

Please stop...for your own sake, all you're doing is making yourself look silly. You clearly can't stay on topic and you're completely missing the point.

I'm a huge fan of the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment but I'm under no illusions as to how or why it exists just like I'm under no illusions that the current group of gun grabbers in charge of our government are trying to violate it.

You're the one that told someone to do what is legal here but illegal in mexico & go there and do it and see if they get thrown in prison. You likely wont if you have a little bit of money on you.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

You want to see an intelligent, well thought out defense of the 2nd Amendment then watch this video. It's almost 15 minutes long but this is the kind of people we need defending our rights not James "I'm gonna shoot somebody" Yeager:

[video=youtube_share;BHIQtxLCgrM]http://youtu.be/BHIQtxLCgrM[/video]

This is the single best conversation on the issue that I have seen. Shapiro is very bright and very poised. He can argue my case any time.

 

[BillB1960]

This is the single best conversation on the issue that I have seen. Shapiro is very bright and very poised. He can argue my case any time.

I know...I posted it

 

[chariot13]

A SOFA applies to military forces not civilians. Again, your points are completely immaterial and irrelevant.

Again you're wrong. It applies to US Military, Civilians and Their Dependants Under the Jurisdiction of the US Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA). You must of got your military forces only argument mixed up with areas under military control. Anyways we seem to be on the same page about guns, so all of this is irrelevant.

 

[BillB1960]

You're the one that told someone to do what is legal here but illegal in mexico & go there and do it and see if they get thrown in prison. You likely wont if you have a little bit of money on you.

The fact that you're able to bribe your way out of breaking the law in Mexico is completely irrelevant. The fact is if you bring guns into Mexico and get caught you will be arrested for possessing illegal weapons, weapons that are currently 100% legal in the United States...at least for now. So how can it be a God given, "inalienable" right to possess weapons if you can be arrested and thrown in prison for it? I'll save you some trouble...the answer is it isn't an inalienable right, it's a right granted to us by our government which does not apply in a foreign country.

 

[BillB1960]

Again you're wrong. It applies to US Military, Civilians and Their Dependants Under the Jurisdiction of the US Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA). You must of got your military forces only argument mixed up with areas under military control. Anyways we seem to be on the same page about guns, so all of this is irrelevant.

The SOFA is intended to clarify the terms under which the foreign military is allowed to operate. Typically, purely military operational issues such as the locations of bases and access to facilities are covered by separate agreements. The SOFA is more concerned with the legal issues associated with military individuals and property. This may include issues like entry and exit into the country, tax liabilities, postal services, or employment terms for host-country nationals, but the most contentious issues are civil and criminal jurisdiction over bases and personnel. For civil matters, SOFAs provide for how civil damages caused by the forces will be determined and paid. Criminal issues vary, but the typical provision in U.S. SOFAs is that U.S. courts will have jurisdiction over crimes committed either by a service member against another service member or by a service member as part of his or her military duty, but the host nation retains jurisdiction over other crimes.

And it still has nothing to do with this conversation whatsoever.

 

[chariot13]

The fact that you're able to bribe your way out of breaking the law in Mexico is completely irrelevant. The fact is if you bring guns into Mexico and get caught you will be arrested for possessing illegal weapons, weapons that are currently 100% legal in the United States...at least for now. So how can it be a God given, "inalienable" right to possess weapons if you can be arrested and thrown in prison for it? I'll save you some trouble...the answer is it isn't an inalienable right, it's a right granted to us by our government which does not apply in a foreign country.

You're getting bribery mixed up with extortion. And again you will not be arrested for "possessing illegal weapons" in mexico every time you "get caught". It happens yes but the times we get out of it happens much more. Inalienable does not mean someone can't do you wrong by claiming they have authority over something they do not. It just means that they are willing and capable of ignoring your inalienable rights. No differently than a murderer is willing and capable of ignoring your right to life.

 

[BillB1960]

You're getting bribery mixed up with extortion. And again you will not be arrested for "possessing illegal weapons" in mexico every time you "get caught". It happens yes but the times we get out of it happens much more. Inalienable does not mean someone can't do you wrong by claiming they have authority over something they do not. It just means that they are willing and capable of ignoring your inalienable rights. No differently than a murderer is willing and capable of ignoring your right to life.

I'm done with you. You want to split hairs and play with semantics that's fine but facts are facts. Our rights go no farther than our borders and when you break the law in a foreign country by doing something that's legal in the US then you will go to jail for the prescribed length of time barring unscrupulous officials. Nowhere in any official document you can find does it say that the right to keep and bear arms is "inalienable" or "God given".

And to top it off if you really want to claim that the rights listed in the Constitution are "inalienable" then take a quick peek at the 16th Amendment and tell me that's "God given".

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Yes they can and do. There's nothing "natural born" about the Bill of Rights other than the fact that you were born in a country that is founded upon those rights. If you were born in Canada you wouldn't have them. Stop pretending that the Constitution was written by God. It was written by men who didnt have those rights when they were born.

Never double down on ignorance.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - Declaration of Independence

Americans are born with these rights. Canadians are born with these rights. Ugandans are born with these rights. All people everywhere are born with these rights. Whether those rights are violated is dependent upon whether the people control the government, or the government controls the people, and that is always eventually dependent upon whether the people can defend themselves from the government. The people who wrote the Constitution understood this.

I'm not sure what your beef is, but get educated before you start spouting ignorance.

 

[BillB1960]

Never double down on ignorance.



Americans are born with these rights. Canadians are born with these rights. Ugandans are born with these rights. All people everywhere are born with these rights. Whether those rights are violated is dependent upon whether the people control the government, or the government controls the people, and that is always eventually dependent upon whether the people can defend themselves from the government. The people who wrote the Constitution understood this.

I'm not sure what your beef is, but get educated before you start spouting ignorance.

My "beef" is with people who don't know the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America which you obviously don't. My "beef" is with people who accuse of others of "ignorance" while proudly displaying their own. My "beef" is with idiots like James Yeager who make intelligent gun owners look bad by acting like crazed serial killers and then crying about it and apologizing later when they get slapped down by the state. Clear?

 

[chariot13]

I'm done with you. You want to split hairs and play with semantics that's fine but facts are facts. Our rights go no farther than our borders and when you break the law in a foreign country by doing something that's legal in the US then you will go to jail for the prescribed length of time barring unscrupulous officials. Nowhere in any official document you can find does it say that the right to keep and bear arms is "inalienable" or "God given".

What is "God given" and "inalienable" is not defined. Not to me. When you define anything you're attempting to lessen it with limited & specific parameters or *borders*. I don't care what you or anyone else, anywhere, wants to define as truly God given by rights or limitations for me. We all are individuals with our own personal beliefs and they are as strong as one as it is with the consensus of many.

 

[dmancornell]

My "beef" is with idiots like James Yeager who make intelligent gun owners look bad by acting like crazed serial killers and then crying about it and apologizing later when they get slapped down by the state. Clear?

So Yeager should be punished for words? Sounds like you are against the 1st Amendment. Typical statist.

I am amused by your insistence that inalienable rights don't exist because the Mexican state violate them. Newflash, dummy: *all* states are enemies of liberty.

 

[BillB1960]

So Yeager should be punished for words? Sounds like you are against the 1st Amendment. Typical statist.

I am amused by your insistence that inalienable rights don't exist because the Mexican state violate them. Newflash, dummy: *all* states are enemies of liberty.

Saying 'I'm going to start shooting people' is not covered under 'free speech' particularly when you've been licensed to carry a deadly weapon. The state had every right to pull his CCW and I have every right to call him crazy. I suppose you're just going to ignore the fact that he posted a video with his lawyer apologizing for being an idiot in public.

Being called a "statist" by a paranoid anarchist...hmm...color me unfazed.