OT-Shooting

And the Nazi Enabling Act is very similar to the Patriot Act. The
1930'something weapons act is much the same as the 1968 USA Gun Control
act..... so there is a parallel. We both lost, now.

--

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
www.mormons.com


"CatNipped" wrote in message
...
And although war is all too common, there
are plenty of countries which have changed their governments without
resorting to war at all, certainly without making the potential for
a violent revolution a centrepiece of their national identity.

But I'm getting way off topic here now, so I'll stop.

--
Cheryl

All right, in a vain attempt to end this discussion I'm going to bring up
Hitler (it's usenet law, the discussion is over, I lost!!) ; The first
thing Hitler did was to disarm the populace.

Hugs,

CatNipped

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in
:

And the people clamor "do something", and so the legislators pass more
laws. Each layer of laws, less freedom.

I've felt we need another "house" of government, whose sole power is to
repeal law. Something to fight the ratchet effect. "Doing something" would
consist of getting rid of old laws.

Yep. It's already started in small ways.

--

Christopher A. Young

Hitler. Hitler. Hitlter. I wasn't even playing, but I'll concede anyway. This
thread is becoming one of those that Pam mentioned, where I"m sending posts to
the big nowhere. It's frustrating.

Sherry

Sherry

Cheryl Perkins wrote:

wrote:

Yep, that's true. In theory, the government is us, and in theory, we
vote for them. But power can become a law unto itself, and right now,
there are a lot of people in the USA who don't believe our government
was even legally elected, much less representing the wishes of most of
the people.

So I can expect a second American Revolution any day now????

Don't I wish! The Ukraine we ain't.

I'm not advocating violent revolution or unrestrained access to guns,
I was just agreeing with Stormin' that power likes to perpetuate itself,
and that is certainly the case here, right now.

Joyce

This is a job for Superman! Now where are those tight fitting nylons so I
can go jump off the roof? I wanna be a macho man! (Baha might understand
that reference.)

--

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
www.mormons.com


wrote in message
...
Stormin Mormon wrote:

The real reason we own guns is to defend ourselves against
government gone bad.

You must be very busy right now, then!

Joyce

I'm with you on all of t hose points.

--

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
www.mormons.com


wrote in message
news Stormin Mormon wrote:

It's the nature of elected people to vote themselves more and more
power. we're seeing this now with the Patriot Act, and a few other
legislation. Wash. DC is getting a bit inbred, and a bit too powerful.
I don't th ink any nation is exempt from tyranny in gov't.

Yep, that's true. In theory, the government is us, and in theory, we
vote for them. But power can become a law unto itself, and right now,
there are a lot of people in the USA who don't believe our government
was even legally elected, much less representing the wishes of most of
the people.

Joyce

Yes, contradictory. Freedom requires responsibility. When folks act
responsibly all is well. When they don't, we have courts, jails, probation,
and in the case of government.... elections and primaries, recalls, and we
surely don't reccomend guns. Not as long as anything else can work.

--

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
www.mormons.com


"Cheryl Perkins" wrote in message
...
Stormin Mormon wrote:
It's the nature of elected people to vote themselves more and more power.
we're seeing this now with the Patriot Act, and a few other legislation.
Wash. DC is getting a bit inbred, and a bit too powerful. I don't th ink
any
nation is exempt from tyranny in gov't.

Nothing and no one is exempt from corruption. I am just pointing out that
those two ideals - that of a government for and by the people, and that of
a government that the people must be ready to tear down by lethal force
are inherently contradictory.

Of course, ideals, even those national myths a country is formed on, don't
have to be internally consistent. They aren't facts, after all. But they
are important and powerful ideas, and should be examined and understood. I
admit I don't understand the contradiction here. It's not as though the
American people don't have other mechanisms for reining in their
government should they want to. And although war is all too common, there
are plenty of countries which have changed their governments without
resorting to war at all, certainly without making the potential for
a violent revolution a centrepiece of their national identity.

But I'm getting way off topic here now, so I'll stop.

--
Cheryl

Right about the time the systems (food, television, post office) collapse.
When folks start to get hungry, or their TV is shut off. Whichever happens
first.

--

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
www.mormons.com


"Cheryl Perkins" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Yep, that's true. In theory, the government is us, and in theory, we
vote for them. But power can become a law unto itself, and right now,
there are a lot of people in the USA who don't believe our government
was even legally elected, much less representing the wishes of most of
the people.

So I can expect a second American Revolution any day now????


--
Cheryl

ScratchMonkey wrote:


I've felt we need another "house" of government, whose sole power is to
repeal law. Something to fight the ratchet effect. "Doing something" would
consist of getting rid of old laws.

Robert Heinlein (one of my heroes) proposed just this in his book "The
Moon Is A Harsh Mistress." One of his characters, a Professor De La
Paz, IIRC, said that if he had his way there would be two branches of
legislature. One would pass laws, but only if the vote for the law is
greater than 2/3 as any law so unpopular as to not get that much support
shouldn't be passed. The other branch would be able to repeal laws
with any vote over 1/3 as any law that is so unpopular that at least a
third of the people are against it is a bad law. Did I say that Robert
Heinlein is one of my heroes. I cried when I read about his trip to the
bridge.

Pam S.

Tanada had some very interesting things to say
about OT-Shooting:

I've felt we need another "house" of government, whose sole power is to
repeal law. Something to fight the ratchet effect. "Doing something" would
consist of getting rid of old laws.
Robert Heinlein (one of my heroes) proposed just this in his book "The
Moon Is A Harsh Mistress." One of his characters, a Professor De La
Paz, IIRC, said that if he had his way there would be two branches of
legislature. One would pass laws, but only if the vote for the law is
greater than 2/3 as any law so unpopular as to not get that much support
shouldn't be passed. The other branch would be able to repeal laws
with any vote over 1/3 as any law that is so unpopular that at least a
third of the people are against it is a bad law. Did I say that Robert
Heinlein is one of my heroes. I cried when I read about his trip to the
bridge.

I spent some time glooming when I heard that, having grown up on his
books [OK, some of the later stuff left a bit to be desired, like
plotline other than various amorous interludes among relatives].

--
"The universe is quite robust in design and appears to be
doing just fine on its own, incompetent support staff notwithstanding.
:-)" - the Dennis formerly known as (evil), MCFL