14 June 2007

Are we a nation of laws?

14 - June - 2007 From The Alaskan Command Center:

Time and time again we hear, 'we are a nation of laws', if this is true, which I have a major doubt, then it would seem to me that laws which are in violation of the law should be automatically struck down and should not have to wait for challenge by anyone.

I submit in to evidence the 2nd Amendment, which states in part, 'the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed'. If this is law, and the law itself proclaims itself to be 'the law of the land', then no law can be made that would violate this law. The word infringed and its root, were not chosen by chance or mouth feel, but by understanding the exactness and well understood meaning that the word represents. If we say, shall not be infringed, it means nothing may limit in any way, the said right. So to require a permit or license to own, or have a arm is in violation of the law. To limit the rank or type of arm, is a violation of the law.

While I do not disagree individuals who wield such arms as nuclear weapons, large scale bombs, or other arms of destruction are perhaps not what the founders have in mind, that the law does allow these weapons to be 'kept and bared'. If you have a problem with the law, you change the law, you do not pass a law that obviously is in violation of the law just because you don't agree with it.

I personally find that people are far more inclined to leave 'well armed individuals' to their own devices, and in turned peace is maintained. It is when these 'well armed individuals' violate the natural rights of others that they should be stood up to with defensive force.

So back to the statement, 'we are a nation of laws', in fact I can prove we are not. Men in suits create laws. Men in uniforms enforce those laws. Men in robes punish those who violate those laws. If we are a nation of laws, then the law itself would be followed by everyone because it is in their best interest to do so. In fact we are not a nation of laws, we are a nation of men. Men decide what is and isn't law. Men decide what laws are to be enforced and not enforced. Men punish others who violate those laws that were found sufficiently 'good' to be enforced, regardless if the law is just or not.

So I say on to you, we are NOT a nation of laws, but a nation of men. So long as we are a nation of men, ruling over other men, we will be slaves to these men. It is only when man is free from other men, and their passing of laws, that we will be free.

In freedom comes the ability to freely associate with whom you want to, without being forced by the point of violence to comply with a law, even when that law is immoral and/or illegal. Freedom means being able to own anything one wants to own without any regard to its purpose that one wishes to own. Freedom means being able to travel anywhere one wants to go without any regard to how one chooses to transport ones self. Freedom means being able to believe in the God or Gods you want to, or to not believe in those same God or Gods.

However with freedom comes equal responsibility. For you can not have an action without a equal and opposite re-action. If you have the freedom to own anything you want, you have the responsibility to maintain, hinder, or otherwise protect others from that thing. Having the freedom to associate with anyone you wish to, also means that you are judged by the actions of that other individual. The freedom to travel anywhere by any means also includes the responsibility of making sure you don't go where you are not welcome, nor that you damage others or their property in doing so. Your God or Gods, or lack thereof, are also your responsibility in that you have the freedom to spread the word of your ideology, others do not have to listen to you.

In short, or long as it is, we are not a nation of laws. We are nation of men. So long as we are a nation of men, we will not be free. We will continue to be their slaves until such time as we decide otherwise. While we may not agree in how this happens, we ought to support those that wish to cast of the yoke of servitude and help them in our own ways to achieve their goals. Normally I would say that 'man is at his best when he is thinking of himself first because in doing so, he will naturally help society as a whole'. With this in mind, I ask, is it not in your best interest to help those who desire that which all free men seek, that being the state of freedom? Grab this show Subscribe to the show COMMENTS

No comments: