It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Logarock
Yes its a crime becouse its so stupid. The lefty radicals relized years ago that the only way to overthrow the governement was through the democratic process.
Now you're getting it!
Want a change in this government? Elect better people! If you think they are all crooked, run yourself.
No need to commit Seditious Conspiracy or Treason to change the government. You just need to put better representatives in Congress.
Well ok fine but who said I was for the violent overthrow of the government? You are talking to me as if I had promoted this.
Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Logarock
But if you want to destroy this country by starting a Revolution? I can't help you, in fact I would if push comes to shove fight against anyone who would be willing to destroy this country. Because violent revolutionaries have the exact same goal as Al Qaeda. Their means to that end may differ, but it is my opinion that violent revolutionaries only goal is to destroy this country and twist it into some deranged version of what they and only they think America should be. They in my opinion don't want to protect the constitution, they want to rip it up. They want their own version of freedom and that version doesn't include a lot of people. I can never and I will never support any violent revolutionary movement and anyone with their own mind shouldn't either.
Originally posted by whatukno
Seditious conspiracy
or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States
The US House of Representatives Thursday passed the District of Columbia appropriations bill and in so doing removed an 11-year-old amendment barring the District from implementing the medical marijuana law approved by voters in 1998. Known as the Barr amendment after then Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA), the amendment has been attacked by both medical marijuana and DC home rule advocates for years as an unconscionable intrusion into District affairs.
Originally posted by whatukno
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2384
Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
You could be subject to a fine. Or you could be jailed for up to 20 years.
Sorry, your little song and dance with the Declaration of Independence doesn't cut it. It in fact is a crime to conspire to bring down the United States Government by force. Sorry internet revolutionaries. But those are the facts. In fact in a way you are putting a lot of liability on the ownership of ATS for discussing such things on a public forum.
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Every revolutionary in history, every single one, has been considered and enemy or a criminal by those he wished to overthrow.
The words 'criminal' and 'crime' are completely subjective. Its all a matter of perception.
Originally posted by atreides
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Every revolutionary in history, every single one, has been considered and enemy or a criminal by those he wished to overthrow.
The words 'criminal' and 'crime' are completely subjective. Its all a matter of perception.
Etymologically, they're not at all subjective. They have very objective definitions. A criminal is a person who acts in contravention of a law established by a body that makes laws.
You can argue about the legitimacy of XYZ law, ABC legislature, etc., but the term "criminal" is objective, not subjective.
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
I disagree, but at this point it is purely semantics.