What would Thomas Jefferson do in time like these?

[theminutemenrideagain]

I write this in post in this forum because I belive it is the most viewed by members and I will say in advance that it is not exactly political or about legal so if you are the kind of person who will get offended by me posting in the wrong area then dont read the post and if you do please do not complain about it.
Now with that said I would kinda like to get peoples insight on the whole situation we are faced with right now and I would like to know that people realize how much is truly on the line and what we are faced with, the GOVT is preparing for the crisis about to take place right under peoples noses and yet they are still passing more taxes and are working on stealing the rights that our fore fathers laid out FOR THIS EXACT SITUATION, and what is going to happen is people are going to sit around and wait till they have disarmed america, then there will be done, and it makes me think back on what hitler did, everything he did was legalized by him and the people went along with it and history ALWAYS repeats itself. It has been proven time and time again and I just cant belive how ignorant the people of america have become because it is truly a shame that the country has become nothing but a bunch of cowards, no please do not get me wrong when I say that because I know that there is still very many GREAT americans but the majority is not. I belive that if actions are not taken that we are facing one hell of a problem. Now I am not a great man or a good speaker but I belive that everybody is so worried about taking actions because it might " be against the law" once again think back to hitler, and also think back to the boston tea party and im sure the english found that to be "illegal" also, im not saying to go out and be anarchist or anything but drastic times call for drastic measures.

"Here in america we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionist and rebels - Men and Women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine, As there heirs may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion"
-Dwight D. Eisenhow-

I truly belive that we will never fall if we stand together

Read More

 

[dmancornell]

Thomas Jefferson would either be locked up at Guantanamo Bay as a terrorist or murdered by federal SWAT for thoughtcrimes.

 

[osterr1999]

He would likely be in jail or be labeled a loon and dismissed. It is sad how far we have strayed from the fundamentals that this country was founded on.

 

[AlphaCoyote]

What would he DO? Nothing that would inspire the Tea Party.

One of the greatest people (not just Americans) of the modern age, but he was more encouraging than active. He wrote a lot, so there are some juicy tidbits we like to cull, but he wasn't much of a revolutionary when it came to action.

So if he were here today, he'd go home, experiment with some new plants, write some letters, order more French wines and some books, ensure his slaves were reasonably well treated in their hovels, then retire to his boudoir at Monticello with Sally Hemmings.

Jefferson is one of my favorite thinkers and writers, but he wasn't much of a doer when it came to aggressive political activism. Despite his words of support, he never spilt the blood of a tyrant, or that of anyone else for that matter. He never actively served in a militia or took up arms in support of his ideals. He never served under arms in the revolutionary war. Like our current government, he lived far beyond his means (though they were considerable). So he's not a person to hold up as a "fiscal conservative." He kept his slaves to the end because he couldn't afford not to. He died deeply in debt, though his creditors abstained from foreclosing for a period of time afterward out of respect.

An enigmatic human, and a foundational thinker. But if you think he'd be leading you at the barricades today, no.

A lot of people like to quote Jefferson. Fewer know much about him.

 

[theminutemenrideagain]

Thomas Jefferson shot a man execution style with a flint lock rifle on the white house lawn for TREASON, I never said he would be leading the revolution but i asked what would he do in the current situation with all the manipulation and deception that is taking place at the head of our country, either way thomas jefferson is not the real topic here despite what i wrote the post as, iI threw his name out there only because he was a man that truly understood what would happen if the people let there rights be taken away by the powers of the GOVT.

"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and desirve neither" -Thomas Jefferson"

 

[AlphaCoyote]

Thomas Jefferson shot a man execution style with a flint lock rifle on the white house lawn for TREASON.

Total baloney. You are referring to a fictionalized scene in the 2001 movie "Swordfish." There is no historical record of any such thing having happened, whether in Jefferson's papers or otherwise.

You do realize that sometimes things you see in movies (or read on the internet) are not historically accurate, right?

 

[SonicBlue03]

You do realize that sometimes things you see in movies (or read on the internet) are not historically accurate, right?

You mean Thetans *aren't* immortal spirits? I call hogwash, sir!

 

[slingshot1943]

There was a flintlock in swordfish? Do you realize everything you see in a movie when your smoking dope isn't always true?

 

[Angie]

I concur that Jefferson was more a man of thought than a man of action. Brilliant man, but rarely offered his opinion unless it was asked, though I'm sure while he was President he offered his opinion often. He was a private man and known for his quietness.

Thomas Jefferson shot a man execution style with a flint lock rifle on the white house lawn for TREASON, I never said he would be leading the revolution but i asked what would he do in the current situation with all the manipulation and deception that is taking place at the head of our country, either way thomas jefferson is not the real topic here despite what i wrote the post as, iI threw his name out there only because he was a man that truly understood what would happen if the people let there rights be taken away by the powers of the GOVT.

"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and desirve neither" -Thomas Jefferson"

The Monticello website (reliable source on Jefferson, IMO) knows nothing about this, except that it is a rumor. Where did you hear of this execution? As a History teacher, I've never heard of this, but I would sure like to know it if it is true. I will be surprised if it is. Almost as good of a story as the Burr-Hamilton duel.

And, I'm sorry, but that quote is attributed to Ben Franklin.

Perhaps you should have asked what Sam Adams or the founding fathers in general would do in times like these I get your point, but since you used a specific person with a very well known personality, you have received the responses above. I'm sure they are all rolling in their graves after seeing what the Republicans and Democrats have done to the Constitution they worked so hard to create, which is why I vote Libertarian.

 

[oknow]

don't know what he would do if he was living now but you can bet he's rolling over in his grave now:angry:

 

[CounterOfBeans]

Angie, do you teach history in Oregon? Got an exciting law for you to take a look at if you do.


Um sorry, I just noticed you're out of Nevada.

 

[CounterOfBeans]

I feel your pain THEMINUTEMENRIDEAGAIN. I would side with OKNOW. TJ is definitely rolling in his grave. But on the solutions side of things. How 'bout something that can lawfully bring the fraud and corruption that is all around us down to the ground with one lawsuit.....a class action lawsuit. It would be a lawsuit that Oregonians are well-positioned for because of the clarity of their laws. Here's what I mean.

The whole concealed carry thing is a "licensing" or "permit" thing right? We have, as Citizens, been trained from a young age to believe that the concept of "licensing" the public is legitimate and lawful. That training has been so effective that most people have no reason to question it. But they don't teach us even the basics of law in K-12 public education, like how to accurately read the law for ourselves to tell whether or not someone is blowing smoke.

But sometimes words have different meanings in the law than what we think they do. "License" is a perfect example of that. Here is its definition in Oregon at ORS 183.310(5):

"183.310 Definitions for chapter. As used in this chapter:
(5) “License” includes the whole or part of any agency permit, certificate, approval, registration or similar form of permission required by law to pursue any commercial activity, trade, occupation or profession."

Go ahead and look it up for yourself on the ORS website. Don't take my word for it. Notice how it only refers to "commercial" activity? The Legislature inserted no other words in this definition to cause it to apply to anything else. As a result, it applies to nothing else. It can apply to no one else other than people who want to go get a job that involves the possible use of deadly force....like body guards, or private armed security contractors, etc.

And to make sure that readers don't take the liberty of putting words in their mouths, the Legislature has passed laws to prohibit even judges from adding words or omitting words from the law in order to suit their pre-conceived notions, personal biases or agendas. See ORS 174.010 below:

"CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTES

174.010 General rule for construction of statutes. In the construction of a statute, the office of the judge is simply to ascertain and declare what is, in terms or in substance, contained therein, not to insert what has been omitted, or to omit what has been inserted; and where there are several provisions or particulars such construction is, if possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all."

Simply put, the law applies exclusively only to what is inserted into it by... the Legislature. If it is legitimate to insinuate the inclusion of other things into the law willy nilly, then what's the point of writing the law to begin with if it can simply be added to or subtracted from in order to fit whatever special interest might come along with the shifting political winds. That would render the whole idea of having laws at all moot and make legislators irrelevant. And last I looked legislators are required in a Republican form of government.

When the Legislature chooses to omit words in a law, it's because they recognize that those words are not properly connected to the purpose or context of that law and its subject matter. They do this because the Oregon Constitution requires them to restrict any single law to one subject and matters that are properly connected to that one subject. See Or. Const. Art 4, Section 20:

"Section 20. Subject and title of Act. Every Act shall embrace but one subject, and matters properly connected therewith, which subject shall be expressed in the title. But if any subject shall be embraced in an Act which shall not be expressed in the title, such Act shall be void only as to so much thereof as shall not be expressed in the title...."

Now we know that a "license" or "permit" or "registration" pertains ONLY to people who want to pursue "commercial" activities, trades, occupations or professions. Our right to keep and bear arms is not a "commercial" activity. It's our right and we don't need "permission" to pursue it. If we do need permission, then it stops being a right, doesn't it? Some people are enthusiastic about having a national CCW program, but because they don't know any better they are essentially promoting the throwing away of our 2nd Amendment rights. Rights that have already been paid for with the blood of our founding fathers and successive generations of our military.

By the way, Chapter 183 (see definition of "license" above) of the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) is called the Administrative Procedures Act. This "Act" exists in all States. It governs how the laws are "administered", i.e. carried out, i.e. enforced, by the executive branch's various agencies in the performance of their lawful duties....including law enforcement agencies."

This information, the lawful definition of one word - "license", can be the seed for toppling over institutions that have become monstrous interferences in the lives of Americans who simply want to enjoy what is already theirs, their rights. These institutions have only succeeded in achieving their place in our daily affairs because the actual lawful meaning of that one word has been withheld from our decision making as Citizens. If the implications of this are fuzzy to anyone, don't be shy. Let's talk about it.

 

[Grunwald]

Counter, that is very interesting. Your point would also apply to driver's license, fishing/hunting license. Best of all (or msybe not) all the various permits you have to get to do anything to your own property.

 

[mouse]

I believe Ron Paul is a good example of how people would respond to Thomas Jefferson.

 

[CounterOfBeans]

At Angie,

You go, you libertarian you,

The law I was going to mention to you is an Oregon law and after noticing you were from Nevada, I thought you might not be as excited as I first thought. But well, you liked my post, so I'll just tell you about that exciting law anyway. It's called ORS 336.057. It's been on the books since 1923 and it literally requires all public schools to provide a "course of instruction" that is dedicated to the Constitution for a minimum of 5 (count 'em 5) years. My entire k-12 education was in Oregon's public schools and I know for a fact that the reality of the day however, is that while this law still sits their looking at us, waiting to be administered into the classroom, it is only paid lip service to by other laws that basically amount to being supplementary to this one. How much class time is spent studying the Constitution at your school in Nevada? How do you feel about it?

 

[CounterOfBeans]

Counter, that is very interesting. Your point would also apply to driver's license, fishing/hunting license. Best of all (or msybe not) all the various permits you have to get to do anything to your own property.

Mmm hmm. You know how we've always been told that the public's use of the highway is a "privilege". Check that by taking a look at the plainly-worded legislative intent of ORS 801.305. If anyone wants to continue insisting on the conventional wisdom of "driving is a privilege", have them go take a look at ORS 174.030. Want to see who police can pull over for non-crime offenses (i.e. violations)? Have a read of ORS 153.039. There's a lot more where this comes from.

The depth of our duping is a bit staggering when you think of how ever-present these programs are in our lives, chipping away at our ability to support ourselves as the price for enjoying things that have always been ours to enjoy without permission.

 

[Boomerang]

You should check out the movie V for Vendetta.

 

[CounterOfBeans]

You should check out the movie V for Vendetta.

Are you a fan?

 

[Burt Gummer]

Thomas Jefferson would either be locked up at Guantanamo Bay as a terrorist or murdered by federal SWAT for thoughtcrimes.

Yes he would.

Saying things like this is not allowed:

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.

To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father's has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.

I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. (Back then!)

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.

The god who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.

And the day will come, when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His Father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva, in the brain of Jupiter.

In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock.

What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.

The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.

When wrongs are pressed because it is believed they will be borne, resistance becomes morality.

Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.

Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add "within the limits of the law," because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.

It is strangely absurd to suppose that a million of human beings, collected together, are not under the same moral laws which bind each of them separately.

Liberty is the great parent of science and of virtue; and a nation will be great in both in proportion as it is free.

He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

I have sworn on the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

I have never been able to conceive how any rational being could propose happiness to himself from the exercise of power over others.

To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

In a government bottomed on the will of all, the...liberty of every individual citizen becomes interesting to all.

I'm a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it.

Say nothing of my religion. It is known to God and myself alone. Its evidence before the world is to be sought in my life: if it has been honest and dutiful to society the religion which has regulated it cannot be a bad one.

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Most bad government has grown out of too much government.

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.

The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.

A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.

I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others.

Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?

A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.

The right of self-government does not comprehend the government of others.

An elective despotism was not the government we fought for.

History, in general, only informs us what bad government is.

If there is one principle more deeply rooted in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest.

It is better to tolerate that rare instance of a parent's refusing to let his child be educated, than to shock the common feelings by a forcible transportation and education of the infant against the will of his father.

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just.

The man who reads nothing at all is better than educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.

I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.

In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to Liberty.