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.

 

Nullify Now! US tyranny defense.

page: 1
70
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+28 more 
posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 11:53 PM
link   
Tell me, if the government passes blatant unConstitutional legislation, what is your obligation to follow the legislation? Are you to wait for four years or so, to get a different Congress or different President to rescind the legislation? Are you to wait for 6 or more years to let a case go to the Supreme Court, to rule that the legislation is unConstitutional?

What exactly is your responsibility, as the sole Constitutional empowered holder, of your rights? Not to mention the sole; TRUE, Constitutional representative of your rights. If you do not have Constitutionally defined rights, then WHO does?

I would like to point you to a discussion on the powers inherent to the people at this site-

Nullify Now!

I am going to include in this thread some of the information they have on the site, better to go there and do a lot of reading and listening though. Very valuable information to reassert our individual and state Constitutional defined Rights. Our rights are not given by the Constitution or the government, they are endowed by our creator or by our very existence, whichever you prefer to accept by your beliefs.

A snippet-



Did you know that states don’t have to obey unconstitutional federal legislation forced upon them?

Virginia, Utah, Idaho, and other states are fighting the federal healthcare law. Arizona is protecting its borders. Washington State, Oklahoma, and Tennessee are fighting cap-and-trade legislation. Eight states are standing up for gun rights. Twenty-five states have effectively blocked the 2005 Real ID Act…

How? Through nullification.

When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as that state is concerned.

Nullify Now! is a multi-city event tour focused on education and activism on a state level to say NO to unconstitutional federal “laws” – which, in reality, are not laws at all.


I will add to the beginning of their site introduction, that many states have reasserted their 10th amendment rights. Montana has reasserted the rights of their citizens for the absolute right to bear arms and that their citizens need not follow ANY federally mandated gun regulations or restrictions.


I will now give you a video of a speaker at an event on 9-4-2010, in Fort Worth Texas. Michael Boldin

He went over the Constitutional basics of nullification.

A snippet of the video-



There are a few core beliefs that guide me in everything I do as the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center:

1. Rights are not “granted” to us by the government – they are ours by our very nature, by our birthright.
2. ALL just political authority is derived from the people – and government exists solely with our consent!
3. We the people of the several states created the federal government – not the other way around!
4. The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government in the Constitution – and nothing more.
5. The People of each State have the sole and exclusive right and power to govern themselves in all areas not delegated to their government.
6. A Government without limits IS A TYRANNY!
7. When Congress enacts laws and regulations that are not made in Pursuance of the powers enumerated in the Constitution, the People are not bound to obey them.

These seven items – are what establish the proper role of government under the constitution. But sadly, an honest reading of the constitution as the founders and ratifiers gave it to us makes clear that MOST of what D.C. does today is NOT authorized by the constitution.


The video. This is the first of three, I am sure the other 2 can be followed through YouTube or they are posted below the video on the site linked.




Another Patriot on the nullification movement. Ron Paul





“The revolutionary spirit we have today is delightful….We’re actually talking about nullification and the 10th Amendment once again!”

“It is possible to have nullification without undermining our whole system. It’s the idea that if we’re mistreated and overtaxed and overregulated, that we have that option to put brakes on the federal government.”




Well to finish up, I am going to link some threads here on ATS, that involve the state nullification and jury nullification discussion.

Jurror nullification, have any of your heroes done this?

Is there a victim? Jury Nullification and YOUR RIGHTS!

New Hampshire Fires First Shot Of Civil War

I am going to include this thread, though the author postulates that the supremacy clause allows the federal to do pretty much ANYTHING, the other members fairly destroyed the argument.
Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution vs Tenth Amendment

Texas gov. back resolutoin affirming sovereignty

The Law Must Not Be Questioned

Sheriff threatens Feds with Swat Team

Texas gov. back resolutoin affirming sovereignty

YES! Tennessee Introducing 10th Amendment Bill!

Thanks to all the authors of the above threads.

link~~~~~Nullify Now!~~~~~link




edit on 12-9-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:03 AM
link   
If I do not want to pay taxes, I will not work.
If I do not want to follow rules, I will remain isolated
If I do not want to believe the lies, I will follow the truth.
I have the power to do all these things.
The government has no power over me when my will is strong.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Well I would change a couple of your initial points but well said.

The government rules by the CONSENT of the governed.

If we or I do not consent, they have no power.

Thanks for the comment.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 01:47 AM
link   
It is the federal government over states. Why do you think I don't have a legal medical marijuana card.

They would have every right, instantaneous, to come into my home at any time. Take my assets, claiming that I sold pot illegally to acquire what I own.

On a larger scale, as you state, they can round us up and put whomever they want into "camps" at any second!

The camps are built, unemployment is staggering- 1940s like and if it gets to 1920s like- watch out.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 01:56 AM
link   
So, we have people who would rather prop up the health insurance industry nullifying laws? Who do you think they're working for? Hmm?




edit on 13-9-2010 by The Sword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Tribble
 



It is the federal government over states. Why do you think I don't have a legal medical marijuana card.

What would you need a card for, to possess or sell a lawful substance? Let me ask you a simple question about the Constitutionality of making a substance illegal. If it took a Constitutional Amendment to make alcohol illegal, why does it not take one to make any other substance illegal?



They would have every right, instantaneous, to come into my home at any time. Take my assets, claiming that I sold pot illegally to acquire what I own. On a larger scale, as you state, they can round us up and put whomever they want into "camps" at any second! The camps are built, unemployment is staggering- 1940s like and if it gets to 1920s like- watch out.


Exactly! So we either have to do something about it, or the likes of this guy-Congressman Stark "The federal government can do pretty much anything." Which begs the question, does that mean the federal government can round up anyone they want? Imprison anyone they want? Kill anyone they want? You are absolutely right, be safe.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:14 AM
link   
Great choice in topic for your post. S+F from me.

People need to look into the information you have provided then after that they need to do the hard part, understanding just how important it is for people to stand up for themselves against governments that have become oppressive.

An example I like to use is the "drug war". Doing drugs is victimless 99 times out of 100. People doing drugs have made the decision to do the drug in the first place. This does not make a victim out of anyone, therefor it does not make the activity a crime. So why are so many people being brought up on criminal charges?

Its because the general public has been lied to for years being told to leave "the matters of law" to the "professionals" now the common man knows nothing and is taught nothing in school about how our legal system works, "You need to go to law school to learn that!" Our children are told. Let me tell you something most of you already know, law school is expensive I attended one for 6 years, I know. There is a very good reason WHY it is expensive. It is a closed club. It is closed because the only way this current legal system can stay in power is if the majority that believe in it are blind to how it works.

Now, sitting in court day in and day out I see Joe Q. Taxpayer sitting there looking meek, his "professional" lawyer standing up talking for him, using words Joe THINKS he understands but does not. For they have all been redefined to mean something completely different in each Act, Statute and Bill the government passes. His lawyer sworn to protect the SYSTEM before the CLIENT.

Why don't people wake up and get it? The legal system and LAW are one of the biggest parts of our lives, it dictates EVERYTHING that we do, from driving to work to socializing even... SEXUAL ACTS... Shouldn't law/legal studies be taught from grade 1 on through high school? The government always, ALWAYS falls back on "But the law says..." usually coupled with or followed by "Ignorance of the law is no excuse..." So wouldn't it be prudent to be teaching everyone about this?!?! Not in the governments view! Because then by grade 2 we would learn what every law student learns in 1st year law school... Nullification is the BEST way to say, "But we the people do not agree, so as our servants get stuffed..."

Great post!

-Lightrule



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 


Do you really have to have insurance? I mean, can you not save money? Can you not set up a payment plan?

Why is it that we all need to pool our money, by the threat of prison or fines? Why can you not do that VOLUNTARILY? You know, set up co-ops, unions, whatever.

Why does it always have to be at the end of a gun barrel?



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:24 AM
link   
star and flag
if the abuses of law occour then only by the law should they be remidied
law abiding people using study to show what the truth in law is reminds us all that these law are to serve us not tiranny
i am not american but i do see

what happens to the states will happen to us all

america is the only western country the elite are scared off

keep up the good work op

xploder



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Lightrule
 




An example I like to use is the "drug war". Doing drugs is victimless 99 times out of 100. People doing drugs have made the decision to do the drug in the first place. This does not make a victim out of anyone, therefor it does not make the activity a crime. So why are so many people being brought up on criminal charges?


Yeah, I went over that in this thread. A little cognitive dissonance so to speak. I even asked this question to someone that is vehemently against the legalization of any illegal drug. If it took a Constitutional Amendment to make alcohol illegal, why not any other drug?

Yeah, I hate the ignorance of the law is no excuse tenet. If the Supreme Court could get together and in one month write every statute down (there are over 600,000 in the US), I would follow their "color of law" legislation. But there is no possible way they could.

Yes, all forms of nullification need to be pursued. State nullification and jury nullification. There are other ways such as asking for jurisdictional hearings, but those are better handled by the better informed.

Thanks much for commenting. I appreciate your input. Have starred many of your comments on the law discussions.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:40 AM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Yes absolutely.

The LAW shall set us free.

"Are we a nation of laws, or of men?"

I cannot find the originator of that statement, it has many references.

But, I will post one of the statements relevant to it-

From this Lincoln speech, at the early age of 28-showcase.netins.net...




The question recurs, "how shall we fortify against it?" The answer is simple. Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor;--let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children's liberty. Let reverence for the laws, be breathed by every American mother, to the lisping babe, that prattles on her lap--let it be taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges; let it be written in Primers, spelling books, and in Almanacs;--let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short, let it become the political religion of the nation; and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor, the grave and the gay, of all sexes and tongues, and colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its altars.


Fiery speech there baby!


edit on 13-9-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: edit to add link



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


its interesting that three things in that speach are missing from todays standards
teach law as a subject at school (you have 600,000 laws to know to be american)
it is every persons duty under law to protect and uphold the laws (you must report a crime)
if something can be done it must be done legally

xploder



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Tell me, if the government passes blatant unConstitutional legislation...


Just because your brand of constitutionalism doesn't follow mine doesn't make mine or yours any more or any less constitutional. Much like followers of the old testament are any more or any less Christians than followers of the new testament.

I will trust the interpretation of the law by the supreme court over your interpretation. Mainly, because I don't see anything unconstitutional about any legislation passed in the past two years.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


Why did you only say the last two years?
Trying to make this partisan?

Patriot Act
Federal Gun Laws
Federal Reserve
Foreign Military Bases
Non enforcement of our Sovereign borders and immigration laws


Well let me see, I brought up 5 things are not singularly applicable to this administration.
Care to address those?

Oh by the way, the Constitution was written in common language on purpose. Court precedent aside, if any legislation or court interpretation violates the language of the Constitution, or is not PRESENT in the Constitution, the Federal government does not have that power.

Commerce interpretation and General Welfare interpretation be damned. If it is NOT in the Constitution-

10th Amendment Arguments-

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.



edit on 13-9-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: edit to change of to or



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 03:11 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


I see we are in an accord. I have (examples in my local paper) where the Fed comes in - on the legal marijuana card premise, and seizes some poor souls plants and sometimes their possessions. The plants have been burned and the property (gone missing) after winning the court case.

If and when they come to round us up- for whatever. IMO nothing will matter. I will have to go along. Overpowered.
The only answer I can think of to avert this BS is threads like this that wake people up, and not vote the popular way. Schwarzenegger (in California) had a tall stance when he got elected. However he has taken more than a few lumps by trying to sway the other electives. But I think California wanted as much change as possible from the same O same O. Therefore he won Governor. It didn't amount to much, but it was a start.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 03:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Tribble
 


Oh yeah, what you need out there in California is some sheriffs like this guy-

Sheriff threatens Feds With A SWAT Team

I think I included that in my OP.

People need to learn the Constitution, elect local, county and state representatives that will follow the Constitution.

Then they need to demand their rights. No longer let anything go. Heck, if people can, move to places that are pushing the rights of the people and the states and vehemently exert your rights.

Thanks for the comment.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by links234
 


Why did you only say the last two years?
Trying to make this partisan?


Your first argument of unconstitutional law passed was the health care refrom bill and the various states fighting it.


Patriot Act
Federal Gun Laws
Federal Reserve
Foreign Military Bases
Non enforcement of our Sovereign borders and immigration laws

Well let me see, I brought up 5 things are not singularly applicable to this administration.
Care to address those?


Those are all thread worthy in their own respects and just two of those is too many to go into great detail here. However, I'd welcome debate on any one of them.


Oh by the way, the Constitution was written in common language on purpose. Court precedent aside, if any legislation of court interpretation violates the language of the Constitution, or is not PRESENT in the Constitution, the Federal government does not have that power.

Commerce interpretation and General Welfare interpretation be damned. If it is NOT in the Constitution-
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


The beauty of the constitution; where in the 9th amendment it says:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


I would interpret this as saying that, even if it's not in the constitution, it still is constitutional if the people wish it to be so. If the people, represented by congress, want any of those that you listed or any that you did not, then it's constitutional...simply because the 9th amendment says so.

Where we see issue is when a law is passed that may contradict the constitution, we tend to leave the interpretation of the contradiction up to the supreme court, not ourselves.

So ultimately, the constitution leaves rights not specifically stated in the constitution to the people, who are represented in congress. This is why congress can write laws and still be within the realm of the constitution without adding to the constitution.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 03:44 AM
link   
reply to post by links234
 




Your first argument of unconstitutional law passed was the health care refrom bill and the various states fighting it.


Not my first argument, that was from the site. But very true to the point of FORCED purchase of a service. Hmmm, yeah, that is the Constitution.



The beauty of the constitution; where in the 9th amendment it says:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


I would interpret this as saying that, even if it's not in the constitution, it still is constitutional if the people wish it to be so. If the people, represented by congress, want any of those that you listed or any that you did not, then it's constitutional...simply because the 9th amendment says so.


That has got to be the funniest twisting of the 9th amendment I have ever seen.

The 9th and the 10th are STATING BLATANTLY, those rights not in the Constitution, remain with the STATE or the PEOPLE.

WOW, gotta to put that one up as a true blatant misrepresentation. Tell me, if what you say is your argument, would it not then take a Constitutional Amendment to make it so?

Or you just going to say that the steps to amend the Constitution are just too hard. That to break the law it is okay?

WOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWW!



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
The 9th and the 10th are STATING BLATANTLY, those rights not in the Constitution, remain with the STATE or the PEOPLE.


Exactly, the people are passing constitutional laws through their representatives in congress. Any of the examples you've given are constitutional because of the 9th amendment. The constitution grants rights not in the constitution to the people, who are represented by congress. Lincoln said it best, "Government of the people, for the people, by the people." If you have a problem with government you have a problem with the people.


Tell me, if what you say is your argument, would it not then take a Constitutional Amendment to make it so?


There is already a constitutional amendment to make it so, it's called the 9th amendemnt.


Or you just going to say that the steps to amend the Constitution are just too hard. That to break the law it is okay?


To break the law is not ok, abide by the law, even if you disagree with it but work to change it, always.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 04:06 AM
link   
endisnighe, haven't you done this thread already? I swear you have already done this topic two or three times now.

This is why we have the judicial branch. They decide, not you, what is constitutional and what is not.



new topics

top topics



 
70
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join