Well done patriots and citizens in Nevada

Well done patriots and citizens in Nevada

Well done patriots and citizens in Nevada well done but understand they will be back having no Illusions on this point of fact we the Resistance and citizens stand with and beside your right to freedom and due process,In this light the government at all levels has lost sight by the introduction of laws that changes us from the freest nation on earth into a nation of serfs. This raises the question about the purpose or value of laws beyond those set forth in our founding.
A law does not make a person behave in any specific way; it only represents a threat of reprisal and cannot stop a free person from taking the liberty to violate it. The sum of more laws only means more punishments and imprisonment to be carried-out by the government on the free people of our nation. Our laws should be more like; “don’t sweat the small violations and all violations are small”. Did or have you ever considered why the founders didn’t create a civil or federal police force and left policing if necessary to we the people. That as we as a nation grew we didn’t create law enforcement agencies we created police agencies for the purpose of keeping the peace, not enforcing the laws, but to protect us from violence and crime and investigation, where law enforcement was strictly the purview of the legal system and the courts.

Mr Bundy’s the confrontation isn’t necessarily over. The federal cattle rustlers may still sneak back after the dust settles. If they come back (and Sheriff Richard Mack says they’re already planning to do so), they should come back with great, implacable fury. They will almost certainly kill or jail Bundy and most of those who stand with him. But they won’t deprive this country of the example Bundy has set or the memory of what can be achieved by one courageous man, his family, neighbors and few “Minute Men”.
As much as we need them, we don’t see many heroes these days. So, I’m grateful for having seen Cliven Bundy. I’m grateful for the price he’s paid and perhaps even for the price that he may yet pay. You should be, too.
One thousand people stopped the gov-co, in this last confrontation. I don’t think that’ll be enough if there’s another raid. Next time, it may take 3,000. Maybe even 5,000.
If I recall correctly, Thomas Jefferson once observed that “The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” I think that tree is still thirsty.
The essence of humanity is freedom. Government – whether voted in peacefully or thrust upon us by force – is essentially the negation of freedom. Throughout the history of the world, people have achieved freedom when those in power have begrudgingly given it up. From the assassination of Julius Caesar to King John’s forced signing of the Magna Carta, from the English Civil War to the triumph of the allies at the end of World War II, from the fall of communism to the Arab Spring, governments have permitted so-called nobles and everyday folk to exercise more personal freedom as a result of their demands for it and their fighting for it. This constitutes power permitting liberty.
The American experience was the opposite. Here, each human being is sovereign, as the colonists were after the Revolution. Here, the delegation to the government of some sovereignty – the personal dominion over self – by each American permitted the government to have limited power in order to safeguard the liberties we retained. Stated differently, Americans gave up some limited personal freedom to the new government so it could have the authority and resources to protect the freedoms we retained. Individuals are sovereign in America, not the government. This constitutes liberty permitting power.
But we did not give up any natural rights; rather, we retained them. It is the choice of every individual whether or not to give them up. Neither our neighbors nor the government can make those choices for us, because we are all without the moral or legal authority to interfere with anyone else’s natural rights. Since the government derives all of its powers from the consent of the governed, and since we each lack the power to interfere with the natural rights of another, how could the government lawfully have that power? It doesn’t. Were this not so, our rights would not be natural; they would be subject to the government’s whims.
To assure that no government would infringe the natural rights of anyone here, the founders incorporated Jefferson’s thesis underlying the Declaration into the Constitution and, with respect to self-defense, into the Second Amendment. As recently as two years ago, the Supreme Court recognized this when it held that the right to keep and bear arms in one’s home is a pre-political individual right that only sovereign Americans can surrender and that the government cannot take from us, absent our individual waiver.
There have been practical historical reasons for the near universal historical acceptance of the individual possession of this right. The dictators and monsters of the 20th century – from Stalin to Hitler, from Castro to Pol Pot, from Mao to Assad – have disarmed their people, and only because some of those people resisted the disarming were they eventually enabled to fight the dictators for freedom. Sometimes they lost. Sometimes they won.
The principal reason the colonists won the American Revolution is that they possessed weapons equivalent in power and precision to those of the British government. If the colonists had been limited to crossbows that they had registered with the king’s government in London, while the British troops used gunpowder when they fought us here, George Washington and Jefferson would have been captured and hanged.
We also defeated the king’s soldiers because they didn’t know who among us was armed, because there was no requirement of a permission slip from the government in order to exercise the right to self-defense. (Imagine the howls of protest if permission were required as a precondition to exercising the freedom of speech.) Today, the limitations on the power and precision of the guns we can lawfully own not only violate our natural right to self-defense and our personal sovereignties; they assure that a tyrant can more easily disarm and overcome us.
The historical reality of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer. It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, thus, with the same instruments they would use upon us. If the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had had the firepower and ammunition the Nazis did, some of Poland might have stayed free and more persons would have survived the Holocaust.
Most people in government reject natural rights and personal sovereignty. Most people in government believe that the exercise of everyone’s rights is subject to the will of those in the government. Most people in government believe that they can write any law and regulate any behavior, not subject to the natural law, not subject to the sovereignty of individuals, not cognizant of history’s tyrants, but subject only to what they can get away with.
Stand your ground and dear sir we will stand with you

https://www.facebook.com/FREEDOMORANARCHYCampaignofConscience