[VIDEO] Sparks Fly!!! TN Tries To Nullify Obama's Gun Control:

The arguement that because sheriffs know the feds is no excuse. Do they not know some of those that smoke a leaf that they arrest? The thin blue line is long.
 
bxm042 said:
Shrug. Nations are constantly in flux. I don't see why you believe the 50 states of the United States is somehow set in stone.
Click to expand...

And this nation is in the midst of what looks like a polarization that will never heal. If the political polarization becomes a more clearly delineated geographic one, secession WILL happen.
 
bxm042 said:
Shrug. Nations are constantly in flux. I don't see why you believe the 50 states of the United States is somehow set in stone.
Click to expand...
Because there's a difference between possibility and probability. Theoretically the sun, which is a bubbling cauldron of nuclear fusion, could explode tomorrow; but probability says it won't.
 
Bastiat's The Law said:
Because there's a difference between possibility and probability. Theoretically the sun, which is a bubbling cauldron of nuclear fusion, could explode tomorrow; but probability says it won't.
Click to expand...

10 years before the American Revolution, revolution was unthinkable. It wasn't until 6 years prior, with the Boston Massacre, that revolution even began to be considered. Revolution didn't appear likely until only a couple years before the revolution.

Another historical example is the Soviet Union. Wikipedia has this to say on the subject

There were people who predicted that the Soviet Union would eventually be dissolved before the process of dissolution began with the Polish Round Table Agreement in April 1989.
Authors often credited with having predicted the dissolution of the Soviet Union include Andrei Amalrik in Will the Soviet Union Survive Until 1984? (1970), French academic Emmanuel Todd in La chute finale: Essais sur la décomposition de la sphère Soviétique (The Final Fall: An essay on the decomposition of the Soviet sphere) (1976), economist Ravi Batra in his 1978 book The Downfall of Capitalism and Communism and French historian Hélène Carrère d'Encausse.[1] Additionally, Walter Laqueur notes that "Various articles that appeared in professional journals such as Problems of Communism and Survey dealt with the decay and the possible downfall of the Soviet regime."[2] In the United States, chiefly among conservatives,[3][4] the politician most credited with predicting the dissolution of the Soviet Union is President Ronald Reagan.
Many of the predictions made before 1980 about the fall of the Soviet Union were considered by those who uttered them as a somewhat remote possibility rather than a probability. However, for some (such as Amalrik and Todd) the idea was much more than a passing thought.[2] Whether any particular prediction was correct is still a matter of debate, since the reasons for the Soviet Union's actual collapse may be different from the reasons given by the various authors in their predictions.
Click to expand...

The dissolution of the Soviet Union came out of nowhere for most people. The country was considered by many to be "stable" right up until the dissolution.

The bottom line is a lot can happen in 6 years. Most people will remain oblivious to it until it hits them in the face, but that doesn't make it any less "likely" to happen.

The US Constitution has just about run its course. The country will be undergoing extreme changes very soon to either renew the constitution, or scrap it. Whether it happens in the next 6 years or in the next 30, I can't say for sure.

But I would guess on the lower end of that side, because these unprecedented games bankers are playing on a global scale is rapidly losing stability, and I don't think it can survive for more than a few years at most.

You can remain oblivious to the massive changes that are coming shortly, but it's still going to happen. What exactly is going to happen, I have no idea. But everything is on the table. Secession, revolution, dictatorship, fascism, genocide, World War III, a true return to the constitution, any of these things might happen.

And if I have a choice in how that plays out, I would prefer to peacefully secede while we can instead of getting in a massive bloodbath that we may not even win.
 
bxm042 said:
10 years before the American Revolution, revolution was unthinkable. It wasn't until 6 years prior, with the Boston Massacre, that revolution even began to be considered. Revolution didn't appear likely until only a couple years before the revolution.

Another historical example is the Soviet Union. Wikipedia has this to say on the subject



The dissolution of the Soviet Union came out of nowhere for most people. The country was considered by many to be "stable" right up until the dissolution.

The bottom line is a lot can happen in 6 years. Most people will remain oblivious to it until it hits them in the face, but that doesn't make it any less "likely" to happen.

The US Constitution has just about run its course. The country will be undergoing extreme changes very soon to either renew the constitution, or scrap it. Whether it happens in the next 6 years or in the next 30, I can't say for sure.

But I would guess on the lower end of that side, because these unprecedented games bankers are playing on a global scale is rapidly losing stability, and I don't think it can survive for more than a few years at most.

You can remain oblivious to the massive changes that are coming shortly, but it's still going to happen. What exactly is going to happen, I have no idea. But everything is on the table. Secession, revolution, dictatorship, fascism, genocide, World War III, a true return to the constitution, any of these things might happen.

And if I have a choice in how that plays out, I would prefer to peacefully secede while we can instead of getting in a massive bloodbath that we may not even win.
Click to expand...

Yup. And the mighty Soviet Union dissolved with almost no violence. The big difference is that the USA is more homogenous than was the USSR. The USSR was always internally divided on ethnic and linguistic grounds so when the central power began to totter, there were natural sub-units ready to split off. Most citizens of the USA identify more with the Federal entity than with their state, although many in the Southeast may have stronger regional identification and some urban dwellers (NY, for example) may identify most strongly with their city. So in the USA the parts will not separate so readily.
 
Bastiat's The Law said:
Because there's a difference between possibility and probability. Theoretically the sun, which is a bubbling cauldron of nuclear fusion, could explode tomorrow; but probability says it won't.
Click to expand...

Analogy fail. The Sun is a material object that operates under well known physical constraints and within well-understood & delineated parameters. Human societies are many, many orders of magnitude more complex.

The concepts of probability and possibility in the realm of human action are not even remotely comparable to their counterparts in the physical sciences.

Human beings are not fusioning atoms and human societies are not gravitational fields.
 
Matt Collins said:
Kelsey (Chair) and Campfield (somewhat of a liberty guy) got into a fight near the end. Kesley (Chair) refused to acknowledge Campfield's points of order and other motions. The Governor Haslam (RINO) sent a minion down to say that he wouldnt sign the bill if it passed


Then Kesley wouldn't let the witnesses answer any questions that were being asked by members of the Committee. He answered them instead.


Kelsey ruled that "the nays have it" on a voice vote procedural motion to suspend the rules to allow the witnesses to speak. When Campfield requested the roll call, Kelsey was the only one who voted "nay".


They are scared to death of this bill and are doing whatever they can to kill it.
Click to expand...

If it dies, it should be brought back as a ballot initiative. When the 10th amendment fails, there's still the 9th.
 
Acala said:
Yup, the woman who followed the Tenth Amendment guy is also great, with her tattered copy of the Federalist papers. It warms my heart to see this level of discussion taking place in a legislature with no Ron Paul in sight!
Click to expand...
Trust me when I tell you that the walls were shaking in the Capitol that day. And the establishment was trembling....
 
Well looking at her Facebook, I'm not too sure about her opinions on Dr. Paul, but her arguments were refreshingly sound and she's a constitutionalist, nevertheless.

http://www.facebook.com/publius.huldah

"FOX says he filed his suit with the UNITED NATIONS!

I knew who this guy was from the beginning. He was a fraud then, and never stopped being a fraud. So! Will the paulbots finally see their hero for the fraud he is?"

"Thank you for your informative comments, Michael. I have had experience with both categories in the Ron Paul camp; but didn't understand that the anarchists were just using "constitutionalism" as a bait to trap the others, until you showed us. I knew that Ron Paul didn't really support the Constitution, and didn't know why some people thought he did.

It also explains the vitriolic attacks on our Constitution, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison which I have seen come out of what I now realize is the anarchist camp of the Ron Paul people.

I wondered where the people who babble about the Anti-Federalist Papers and the Articles of Confederation as being better than Our Federalist Papers and Our Constitution got their ideas.

They have NO IDEA that all our Constitution did was to secure some of the rights God gave us. I have shown this, but the RP people won't read it b/c they think they know.

Our Constitution wasn't perfect b/c of slavery. Hamilton & John Jay, among others, were abolitionists. But they were outvoted. Slavery at the time was universal, and man is fallen.

But we fixed slavery.

Anyway, thank you, and you make an excellent investigator. "
 
Last edited:
BAllen said:
RP has said he doesn't necessarily advocate secession, but that it's a tool to keep the government in check. The threat can be as effective as the deed itself. That's what I like about him. He understands the concept of checks and balances, and incentives to solve problems.
Click to expand...

I question the tacit premise here, which is that They give a damn about incentives. They now hold enormous power over a mostly house-broken population. Every outrage is met in the same fashion. 3% are ready to fight, 26% are in love, and 71% (root mean square) are too stupid or apathetic to care either way.

At this point, no single state poses a significant threat to the agenda. Were TX to try and secede, it would be leveled in short order as an example to the rest. The formalities of government are now being observed ONLY because it is convenient for Them. They have militarized the police. Posse Comitatus is formally destroyed. Military, both foreign and domestic, are drilled in firing upon civilians, having been heavily conditioned to the us v. them mentality of elitism. There is sufficient legal infrastructure in place to arrest anyone, anywhere, at any time, for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Most, and I do mean most Americans are more concerned with the newest release for their Xbox than their freedoms. All the heartwarming videos and other accounts of young people getting clued-up are nothing when compared with the endless sea of cow-eyed imbeciles who really do believe that we are on a good track with Bammy, etc.

"We" are outnumbered better than 30:1 by our own population alone. Bring in foreign armies and that goes way up. Do not discount the possibility of Mexican regulars driving north from the border or NATO from Canada. If the agenda is threatened, They will pull out all stops and at this time they almost certainly have the chops to pulls it off. But why take that risk if they can manage the coup with the consent of the cattle?

I suspect that if "we" make an good show of ourselves resisting, They will suddenly show a very different face and the vast majority of the world will stand behind them. Most of this issue stands to be settled within matters of weeks, literally. Nowhere near the required mass of this population possesses the attitude, nor are they materially prepared for a fight like this. They will be logistically sound, we will be starving. That alone will reel the majority of dissenters in within a short span... that or they will simple issue standing kill orders to slaughter anyone failing to fall to their knees on command.

Not trying to be Debbie Downer, but only to remind everyone that They are playing very much for keeps and the odds are not with us.

Fight anyway. Have we anything better to do?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
States Aim to Nullify Obama Gun Control
Replies
6
Views
1K
Athan
Athan
Back
Top