A Crash Dummy Explains The Importance of the Third Amendment

[M]

[jack ludwig]

Bottom line Kevin I don't believe for a single minute that our military will ever have to mow down citizens or do I think our country will ever get to the point the citizens are fighting our military. I think both conditions are so highly unlikely they don't rise to the level of concern.

[kevin kiernan]

The armed forces of the BLM were put in that position at the Bundy Ranch. There were many guns armed and pointing at civilians. If you listen to the video about that, I know you would not say that. You could not say that...If you watched the video.Try researching the loads of videos about that stand off at the Bundy Ranch.

[M]

They not only did that but they stopped flyovers by News choppers and blocked roads coming into the Ranch standoff to block any media from getting in to report. They did not want another media fiasco like they had with the Branch Davidians.

[M]

Jack and Kevin,

The whole point of the video and it's explanation was to show that the Founders did to prevent the fledgling government from becoming as tyrannical as the British government had become. It exemplified the major reason they were severing ties with Britain, and the forced quartering of British troops and those troops having no restrictions on what they could do denoted for them the glaring inequity they were being treated with by their Government. They also understood if the British government took away their guns they would be completely defenseless against anything else the Brits decided to do. That in turn exemplified why the Bill of rights were included in the Constitution as the original ten amendments. In short, the States still feared an overreaching Government that could without those restrictions become another British style dictatorship.

As I said before, the 3rd and what it prevented by what it said to the Federal Government about the limitations imposed on it by the States and the people aired the fears that everyone had about a strong central government that could dictate to the States and to the people.

It's not just about the 2nd amendment, it's about the rightful suspicion held against a central government that is detailing what that government can and can not do, and is showing the peoples rights as superior to that government.

Originally the Bill of Rights did not pertain to the States, their individual State Constitutions were the operating rules for every Sovereign State. Most people forget that each State technically and legally is a sovereign country within it's borders as the Founders intended them to be. they are just allied into a National coalition for mutual protection and prosperity. They don't teach that anymore in Civics classes, and the reason is because the backers of an all powerful central government have used the three words or should I say deliberately misused the three words in the 14th amendment to flip controlling power from it's original intent that the people control the State governments they live in, and the States Control the central Federal Government into the Federal Government having superior control over all else.Those three words were "No State Shall" and the Elitist faction has used those three words ever since to dictate policy to Americans gradually increasing their power and scope through the 16th which provides the money to keep expanding that power and scope so they can bribe us with our own money, and the 17th which ended the control the States had over their Representatives in the central Federal Government, the Senators. It also took away the States control over their State Militias now called National Guard and put it under control of the central Federal Government instead of under the control of the State Governors.

Now individuals are forming Militias in every State and those militias are training. Some are good and some are dangerous. for the most part the militias that are workable are staffed with Veterans akin to the oath keepers and even some police and sheriffs so don't think it would be a one sided fight nor would it be like the Civil War was should the people have to curtail the Federal Government using Force.

The end result would most probably be that the political Union that is the United States would shatter and the US would become several easily conquered nations by foreign sources. That is the reason why in my opinion we should not resort to force unless the Government starts using it against us like they tried to do at the Bundy Ranch attempted land and cattle grab.

The people stood up to Federal Government's armed coercion by standing up with their own weapons drawn and ready to use. the Government forces backed down just as soon as the standoff became public knowledge. Not a shot had to be fired. that is the reason we the people still have the right to bear arms in protection of ourselves and our property. In that you can see a modern day 3rd amendment reaction to the government severely overstepping it's bounds and being rebuked just like the Colonials rebuked the British for forcing quartering on private property and provisioning the troops with privately owned foodstuffs etc. It all has to do with the States Sovereignty, either we have it and are a Republic, or we don't and we are subjects.

[kevin kiernan]

M ,I got that from the video, Iwas just trying to prove to Jack that people will flex the 2nd if they have too. The videos I brought shows how the people will win over an army.Once the masses make a bold enough move the Army will not shoot. They will lower their arms and desert their post. But the masses have to push it to the brink...But it does not seem like Jack bothers to watch the videos. Some people will just get hard headed and never change their minds. You have pointed out the importance of the third in a way that showed me just how important the third is. I never looked at the third in such a way.I try to read everything brought to this site. But some people just dump stuff off way to much. I think we need a rule that if you drop stuff of ,you must read it yourself in full.

[M]

I understand your point Kevin,

[jack ludwig]

Gentleman, I am only trying to point out to you that this issue is relevant only to the time. I have no argument what the founders were trying to achieve with the Bill of Rights and the importance of these amendments. After all, we had the experience of the British Rule we went to war with England to win our independence. The founders built a great document for us to live by and govern and it has worked for more than 250 years. America is a free country and all the citizens know and expect that to remain the same. It is not possible to change the attitude of these masses for a tyrannical government to succeed. And since you cannot change the minds of the masses you cannot get the military and the police on your side so a takeover of the government by tyrannical leaders is not possible. No control of power equals no control of the government. Should a tyrannical group be successful winning over the hearts and minds of the masses it can be a successful movement and there would be little chance the remaining population could be successful overthrowing. Example Nazi Germany.

[M]

Jack, what do you call a government that does not listen to the majority of it's population on critical issues? Citing Illegals, Obamacare, Anchor Babies, Gun Rights, the list goes on.

Therefore the validity of the issues are the same now as they were then.

[jack ludwig]

the will of the people is express by those who go to the polls and vote...the elected representative conducts him/herself in a manner to keep their elected position which requires getting the majority of votes. Those that don't vote have no say how the government functions. Majority rules only of those that vote.

[Virginia Foulk]

Jack, it is a shame, isn't it - and I suspect that those yelling the loudest, are those that don't vote. 

[jack ludwig]

I am not sure that is even true anymore Virginia, I think those of us on both sides of the issue do all the yelling which represents about maybe 30% of the population while the other 70% could care less what happens as long as their goodies and space remain the same. We are lucky if we get 25% of that 70% who even show up at the polls.

[kevin kiernan]

Just want to point out the 70%who only care about themselves. They are selfish. And selfishness is a tool of the devil. That damn devil is on a roll. That crafty BAS-TURD.