i would not bet on it

---------------------------------------------------

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,

deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

— That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,

laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world

-----------------------------

****WHO IS GOING TO HOLD THE GOVT ACOUNTABL AND ENFORCE THE DECALRATION OF INDEPENDANCE

ENTER THE 2ND AMMENDMENT

----------------------------

U.S. Constitution: Second Amendment

Second Amendment - Bearing Arms

Amendment Text | Annotations

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.

----------------------------

DEFINITIONS

-----------------------------

Main Entry: in•fringe
Pronunciation: in-'frinj
Function: verb
Inflected Forms: in•fringed; in•fring•ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin infringere, from Latin, to break, crush, from in- in + frangere to break
transitive verb : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another <the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed —U.S. Constitution amendment II>; especially : to violate a holder's rights under (a copyright, patent, trademark, or trade name) intransitive verb : ENCROACH —in•fring•er noun
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another

en•croach (n-krch)
intr.v. en•croached, en•croach•ing, en•croach•es
1. To take another's possessions or rights gradually or stealthily: encroach on a neighbor's land.
2. To advance beyond proper or former limits: desert encroaching upon grassland.
3. Football To commit encroachment.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

peo•ple (ppl)
n. pl. people
1. Humans considered as a group or in indefinite numbers: People were dancing in the street. I met all sorts of people.
2. A body of persons living in the same country under one national government; a nationality.
3. pl. peo•ples A body of persons sharing a common religion, culture, language, or inherited condition of life.
4. Persons with regard to their residence, class, profession, or group: city people.
5. The mass of ordinary persons; the populace. Used with the: "those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes" Thomas Jefferson.
6. The citizens of a political unit, such as a nation or state; the electorate. Used with the.
7. Persons subordinate to or loyal to a ruler, superior, or employer: The queen showed great compassion for her people.
8. Family, relatives, or ancestors.
9. Informal Animals or other beings distinct from humans: Rabbits and squirrels are the furry little people of the woods

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/people

------------------------------------

SO IF THE GOVT INFRINGES (see DEFINITIONS)

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE (SEE DEFINITIONS)

TO BEAR ARMS

WHO IS GOING TOENFORCE THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
WHEN THE GOVT BEGINS ABUSING THEIR POWERS

------------------------------------


deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

------------------------------------

AND BEGIN RESTRICTING THE

------------------------------------

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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men

-------------------------------------

WHO WILL STEP IN AND REMOVE THE

-------------------------------------

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government

----------------------------------

AND INSTITUTE THE NEW GOVT

DO YOU THINK THE GOVT IS GOING TO DO IT

IT IS UP TO THE PEOPLE

AND TO DO SO THE PEOPLE NEED TO BE ARMED

AN UNARMED PEOPLE ARE SLAVE TO THOSE IN POWER

AND THE GOVT ARE THE MASTERS

WHICH IS NOT WHAT IS WRITTEN IN

THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDANCE

-------------------------------------

deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

I would still think they would be more gun control then complete freedom in that area once they saw an AK47 at work. Also they did not figure that citizens would be crazy and kill for no reason whatsoever.

If we are going to have to have an ISM, might as well be SOCIAL.. grin

i would suspect that would be a reason they would want an armed public

if someone went into a public building and started shooting and got shot by 20 people

i bet there would be a lot less people walking into public buildings opening fire

Me, either.

How many people are walking into public buildings and do that? It's a rare occurrence.

but one they use to advocate gun control

crime goes down when those that commit them can get shot by those they are committing them against

James Madison:
Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people.... [There is also an] inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and ... degeneracy of manners and of morals.... No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence agst. foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.

It's all American-ism to me

Good thing you weren't involved. We would end up with no country and no independence, but with a ban on cannons.

So who wrote this?

WHO IS GOING TO HOLD THE GOVT ACOUNTABL AND ENFORCE THE DECALRATION OF INDEPENDANCE

Enter the 2ND Amendment!

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

Prudence is why Ron Paul was never able to win more than 2% of the American vote!

Thank higher powers for prudence!

that is my argument against gun control

i wrote it

and backed it with other documentation

if it is not in the declaration or constitution i wrote it

unless it is a definition of what is in the declaration or constitution

i am more than likely not the first to do so

but i did it in that script

LOL that is always funny to me. Do you realize how often this kind of "protection" ACTUALLY really happens? Not very damn often.

So instead of just ducking the killers bullets I would have to duck all the 20 other bullets?????!!!!! Not even slightly cool

So Bush the warmonger is the tyrant? Or the beginning of our tyranny?

Again I will have to say that they were in another time and although extremely smart they were not psychics.
They cannot see how this counry would change.

"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -Ben Franklin

they were pretty smart

Are principles not timeless?

gun control doesn't control the bad guys