In this episode aired in the early 1960s, author, commentator and scholar Dan Smoot discusses how the right to keep and bear arms is an indispensable ingredient of freedom.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2epOWeOO2fQ

From two laws on the books from 1934 and 1938, a declaration that a constitutional government can not be instilled until their repeal and now today, not only no repeal but so many more.

But pay close attention to the New World Order as mentioned then, in 1963.

no guns in the grown up world!

Guess that shows you didn't watch the clip.

Where there are no guns is not a grown up world but the manifestation of psychopathic/sociopathic individuals that refuse to grow up. They are still of the juvenile manifestation of my dad is bigger than your dad or I am bigger than you. They come up with a false dichotomy they are gods and deserve to dictate the actions of others, the "Supreme" authority.

Authority, an illusion of a diseased psyche, based entirely in violence and built upon the erroneous and dogmatic belief that some people are masters who have the moral right to issue commands, and others are slaves who have a moral obligation to obey the masters.

Slavery, the belief in the legitimacy of "authority" is the belief in the legitimacy of slavery. Ultimately, "authority" is the idea that man can become God and through "jurisdiction" dictate the law.

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,

http://freeplanetickettonorthkorea.tumblr.com/guns-nazi

Gun Control’s Nazi Connection

I live in a country where we don't have a second amendment but it seems archaic to me that some countries sanction such medieval writings. The amendments were written many years ago and should be rewritten to reflect the current world climate regarding violence and unwarranted attacks on innocent people.

The only people who should have the right to bear arms are the military, police and prison officers. The rest of us should be happy bearing the arms we are born with.

It is not the rifles, weapons that kill, it's the idiots who believe they are the only solution to a situation that carry them who do the senseless killing.

Bring back the death penalty and everyone bearing arms should be judged and sentenced accordingly.

Idiots with weapons, makes no sense.

Seems you do not have a very good understanding of what a RIGHT is!

It is the idiots without weapons that make no sense. A world of slaves waiting to determine if they are allowed to survive. This is normally the mark of a person that has become ruled by their own emotions and sustain personality based in submissiveness and naivete.

Thankfully, the founders of this once great nation had no such schism and gave us the ability to live our lives as free people.

We hear this a lot. Do you really believe the world is more violent now than it was 300 years ago? What has changed?

I hope you also realize that government controls are blanket policies that effect the innocent as well as guilty. Not to quote a movie but, the government is a "broad sword" being called in for situations needing a "scalpel".

If we were to follow this popular policy of removing everyone's rights until no one can do any wrong, we we find ourselves literally being born into prison cells with strict rules. The flip side of that is the fact that prisons are very corrupt and violent institutions, rendering all of these supposed efforts to be vain.

First of all it is important for everyone to acknowledge that the existence of utopia, in which there is no violence and no criminals, cannot exist in this physical universe.

Secondly, these tragic situations will continue to be more prevalent until mankind learns to accept and embrace personal responsibility, instead of forcing someone else to take responsibility for his/her action.

Technically the only way to violate the 2nd ammendment is if a foreign power invades, institutes martial law and bans guns.

If your own government does it, that's just called democratic reform.

actually,that's blatant nonsense!
Read the 2nd again!
What about,"Shall Not Infringed On" you don't understand!
That Right is an Individual Right,not a Privilege granted by Government,but residing in the Individual!
A bit hard to understand in a System that basically still lives by Permission by Royal Decree,regardless of having a Parliament!
System is still way to paternalistic!
One lives by Right,NOT by Permission!

I find this interesting and rather disturbing. So according to you a "right" is a limitation placed on foreign governments' powers over our citizens in the event of an invasion?

Perhaps I didn't pick up on the intended sarcasm?

No, the world is not more violent, just has better communications and much more efficient weapons in which to instill the violence. Also, the same people are still committing the violence, the governments.



And by what right is even a "scalpel" needed much less just where does the government get the "authority" to wield it? If you want to get technical, there is no such thing as government in a constitutional republic, they are but an institution that has been endowed with limited powers to protect the people, not control the people, that is a democracy which is a stepping stone to fascism.



Nice little fable but that isn't reality. Man has an inherent tendency to always do wrong to some degree or another. However, it takes state control to absolutely accelerate that tendency to epic proportions such as we have now where everything is "against the law". Everything being defined as depending on which "class" to which you belong. Also, "against the law" has also had the definition redefined as malum prohibitum, that which is prohibited or to be more explicit, that which is lawful but illegal.



Great statement but rather naivete. For the most part man will never willingly accept responsibility but they will accept that irresponsible act carries penalties. However when you have a society where penalties are less severe than the gain, what really do they matter. When you have a society where "victimless" so called crimes carry larger penalties than actual crime and what do you have? The world as we know it.

Wow, one of the most ignorant statements I have seen in some time. First it shows a total lack of understanding of anything to do with government much less the attributes of a constitutional republic.

Second, it shows total ignorance of even the basic concepts of rights and those that don't understand rights don't have any. Also, there are no rights in a democratic society, as mobs never grant rights, just privileges. A privilege granted can also be a privilege revoked.

What democratic reform? And how do you reform "mob" rule? A democracy is nothing more than the emotional swells, first from one extreme then to the next. As the fable goes, "the difference between a republic and a democracy are two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner and a well armed sheep.

Wow, one from a democracy chastising another from a different democracy.

Perhaps you should read again, there are no rights whatsoever in "our" constitution nor the Bill of Rights. In fact collectively, the constitution, Bill of Rights, and other Amendments remit certain rights of the people to the state.

And if as you say-one lives by right, not permission-then please explain the Swiss people, by democratic process, removing the rights of Muslims in Switzerland? Or is it that in Switzerland, rights only apply to certain classes?

this certainly was suppose to be what the GOP wanted to do was over turn this law ... and if so telling every American that was not covered before an are now is what the GOP will have to do ... + seems more and more Americans are very happy with this... I can't see this happening not now ... really would be to much Chaos if they did ... so I say Good luck with that ...

By GOP overturning a law I would take you are referring to Odumbocare, not the topic but we can go there for a moment. First off it is not law just a sham imposed upon a people that don't know the difference. And if you think the GOP are trying to overturn it, that would be another error, they are doing no such thing, just noise to keep the sheeple divided.

But to infer there would be chaos if it were overturned, that would be comical. Chaos is what is existent now and manifests itself in the manner of what the sheeple seem to accept.