A Few Random Thoughts Of Mr. Jefferson

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by kerf, Jan 30, 2010.

  1. kerf

    kerf Guest

    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.

    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.

    "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 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.

    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.

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

    My friends,
    If you really want to see the hollowness and despotism of our current political leaders, I encourage you to read the words of Jefferson, Madison, Washington and the other Framers. These men were wise beyond the centuries.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2015

  2. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Active Member

    I could not agree more with your closing statement, kerf. Jefferson understood well the dangers of an empowered government, and warned against such often. It is an enormous pity that we, as a people, have ignored his warnings far too long.
  3. seanhan

    seanhan Member

    Guns don't kill people
    people kill people !!!
    I love that one ....
    gotta go clean my Glock .. bye....
  4. seanhan

    seanhan Member

    sometimes chimps kill people too ... Travis !!!
  5. retromike3

    retromike3 Member

    guns don't kill people

    I agree with Chris Rock "guns don't kill people bullets kill people". In some countries if you are a landowner you must have a weapon for defense of your property. In ether case the cat is already out of the bag, we have almost as many firearms as humans in this country(U.S.A.) I myself don't own a gun because I can't see very well and I think a length of steel pipe is quite effective if applied judiciously. I'm a little over six foot and about two ten.

    The reason we have the second amendment is because the founders did not trust the government to remain civil and needed there to be an option were the people could take take the control by force if need be. Up until about sixty years ago we never had much of a standing army. After every other war our army went to about zero, but after WWII we had a slight drop off but then they were replaced by proxy wars and I think we (the U.S.) has the largest standing army in the world.(China may be bigger but I am not sure)

    No one seems to point out how many crimes are prevented from civilians who have guns for there own protection. That is a statistic I would like to know. any clues to that number?

    Mike The bike guy
  6. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    Statistics would be interesting... but they'd need to be too detailed than any study I'd imagine has been done. . . .

    - how many situations were there a gun involved and there was a "positive" reaction from the gun involved?
    - how many situations were there NOT a gun involved and there could have been a "positive" reaction from the gun?
    - how many situtations were there NOT a gun involved and there could have been a "negative" reaction from the gun?
    - how many situations were there a gun involved and there was a "negative" reaction from the gun?

    What could have been... and what is positive/negative is just too crazy...

    ... and I like the idea of defending myself with whatever means necessary best, which is why the Second Amendment is a GREAT idea.
  7. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Active Member

    Anything can be a weapon. Literally, anything. I once knocked a mugger on his face by throwing my shoe at him as he started to run away with my wallet and my girlfriends purse. He did NOT get the opportunity to roll over or fight, as I kicked him in the head with my still shod foot. Then I took the knife he'd held to my girls throat and used it on him.

    No regrets.
  8. kerf

    kerf Guest

    "positive" reaction from the gun involved ????????????

    "negative" reaction from the gun ?????????????

    What the he!! are you talking about, positive - negative, are we talking misfires or failure to hit the target or insufficient terminal ballistics. Again, you've managed to miss the point. Don't you think you would be happier if you just moved your bum a$$ to Venezuela but then again Hugo doesn't allow your kind in country. Sitting around on your moms sofa all day would set a bad example for the peasantry.
  9. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    kerf, talk to retromike... I wasn't the one interested in statistics.

    Here's a quote I just ran across. Enjoy!

    "Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the Covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment... laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind... as that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, institutions must advance also, to keep pace with the times.... We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain forever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."

    -Thomas Jefferson
  10. kerf

    kerf Guest

    Thomas Jefferson, on reform of the Virginia Constitution

    Keep it in context my boy.
  11. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    The point is that it is our DUTY to amend our Constitution(s).
  12. kerf

    kerf Guest

    And just what does your "duty" call for that amendment to be? The Framers set the standard very high for a CA for a reason. That's the reason these Marxist hack politicians just ignore out law, and they are about to be called to task for it. I wish I could say the future held something for you spunky but you'll be on the bus for Canada with Chumski, or whatever his name is.
  13. give me vtec

    give me vtec Active Member

    do you think, for even a second, that you or any of us today are smarter or are more prudent/knowledgeable/educated than our founding fathers??? Like you or any of us can add something to their masterpiece that will enhance it in some way or make it better/more functional???

    now that is delusional... simon take a note.
  14. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Active Member

    Actually, I do think there are some changes needed to the Constitution.

    For example, the 10th amendment is not nearly explicit enough.
  15. give me vtec

    give me vtec Active Member

    I dont think so... how would you change it? Anything more specific would just degrade the sovereignty of the state.

    I think that we are seeing the strength of amendment x through the 10 or so states that are rejecting universal/single payer health care.
  16. kerf

    kerf Guest

    Spunky's thinking more along the lines of an amendment declaring Karl Marx god of the universe. Funny how these people pray on the weak minded among us.

    I'm thinking along the lines of weakening the Federal Government, term limits, balanced budget, no amending bills, things that would pull power from Congress. We would need to act with great care and deliberation.

    Interesting, that the Framers saw fit to exclude the President from the process, other than having a voice as an ordinary citizen.
  17. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    Vtec, if your imagination is so poor that you cannot think of one possible amendment to the Constitution... you need to go get a personality.

    Karl Marx was extremely ignorant. How could you confuse him with God of the Multiverse?
  18. kerf

    kerf Guest

    That is a very interesting comment, spunky but do you even know what you believe or for that matter are saying. Lets quote spunky from spunky's thread You guys ever heard of Noam Chomsky? / Page #31 / Post #308:

    Sounds like you pretty much embrace old Karl word for word. Actually, you jumped right over Socialism and straight into Communism. Congratulations, comrade.
  19. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    In communism... everybody gets the same.

    I said that the workers of a business should share the profits of the business. That's not Communism; that's Libertarian-Socialism the way I see it.

    Communism is when the STATE tells YOU what to do. Libertarian-Socialism is when YOU ARE THE STATE AND THE BUSINESS, GETTING OUT PRECISELY WHAT YOUR BUSINESS DESERVES.

    If you believe that Karl Marx was not ignorant... perhaps you could share his PLAN for reaching Pure Communism? As best I understand, there wasn't even a clue to any plan. That is ignorant.
  20. kerf

    kerf Guest

    Hey DA, Libertarian-Socialism is Communism or haven't you thought about that. If the means of production are held by private individuals (evil Capitalist), just how are they gonna get into the hands of the "workers"? At the point of a gun, like it's always happened. AKA Marxism!