16 votes

People Forget That Concealing Firearms, Cannons, Ammunition Is An Inalienable Right

People forget that CONCEALING FIREARMS, CANNONS, AMMUNITION and EXPLOSIVES from ALL governments is an INALIENABLE RIGHT.

George Washington in response to a proposal for gun registration in 1790 said: "ABSOLUTELY NOT. If the people are armed and the "federalists" DO NOT KNOW WHERE THE ARMS ARE, there can NEVER be an oppressive government."

The ability for the Citizens to bury their Cannons, Cannon balls (including exploding type), Huge stocks of Gun Powder, Rifles and other necessary arms in their fields and in other places, allowed them the MEANS to defend against their own oppressive government.

The RIGHT to conceal from the federal government; The purpose clearly stated to have the power to put down an oppressive federal (or other) government. This is clearly in line with the 12th Grievance of the Declaration of Independence. This defines the Intent of the 2nd Amendment and the intent of the Founders.

President George Washington's statement presented his mistrust in the federal government very clearly; and defined the "true intent" where the powers should lay, and that is in the hands of the civilians, without oversight from government.

-----

We also can draw from James Madison as to:

The True Definition of "MILITIA":

(Paraphrased from Federalist Papers #46)

James Madison: (who wrote the Constitution together the Bill of Rights):

"The highest number to which a "standing army" can be carried in any country does not exceed one hundredth (1/100) part of the souls, or one twenty-fifth (1/25th) part of the number ABLE to bear arms. This PORTION would not yield, in the United States, an (standing) army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men.

To "these" would be "OPPOSED" (APP: indicating that the "MILITIA" is to be a "OPPOSING force" to the standing army, as well as that of foreign enemies)

a (CITIZEN) MILITIA amounting to near half a million CITIZENS with arms in their HANDS,

"officered by men chosen from "AMONG THEMSELVES",

(not by government or the standing army - a indicator of the true definition of "MILITIA")

fighting for "their" (the citizen / militia's) common liberties and united and conducted by government"S" (local) possessing their (the citizen / militia's) affections and confidence.

It may well be doubted whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a "proportion" (ratio) of regular troops (i.e. standing army).

Besides the advantage of (the CITIZENS) being armed, it forms a barrier against the "enterprises of ambition" (Banks, Corporations Foreign Interests), more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.

The governments of Europe are afraid to trust the people with arms. If they did, the people would surely shake off the yoke of tyranny, as America DID.

LET US NOT INSULT the free and gallant CITIZENS of America with the suspicion that they would be "less able to defend the RIGHTS" of which they (THE / ALL PEOPLE) would be in "ACTUAL POSSESSION" than the "debased subjects" of "arbitrary power" would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors."

------

Mr. GEORGE MASON. "Mr. Chairman, a worthy member has asked who are the militia, if they be not THE PEOPLE of this country, and if we are not to be protected from the fate of the Germans, Prussians, by our representation?

I ask, Who are the militia? They consist now of the "whole people", except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper (the Constitution) on the table (being considered) gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and {426} rich and poor; but they may be confined to the lower and middle classes of the people, granting exclusion to the higher classes of the people.

If we should ever see that day, the most ignominious punishments and heavy fines may be expected. Under the present government, all ranks of people are subject to militia duty. Under such a full and equal representation as ours, there can be no ignominious punishment inflicted. But under this national, or rather consolidated government, the case will be different. The representation being so small and inadequate, they will have no fellow-feeling for the people. They may discriminate people in their own predicament, and exempt from duty all the officers and lowest creatures of the national government. ..."

Read the Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788 in FULL: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/americanpatriotpartynewsl...

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/

APP on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/American-Patriot-Party-CC-Nati...

Get Educated and Educate Others.

Know the FOUNDATIONS on which you stand, so that you will know that your actions will have the power of RIGHT.

So when you hear either the Left or so called "Right" (who often "sound" like they are for the Constitution but actually only to those things that benefit them)... say that there should be "some" government regulation, correct them and say, no, there should not.

Arms are not limited to rifles and pistols. And if you hear someone say, "they didn't have weapons like that back then"...Remind them: Without any application to any government, Numerous Cannons could be bought & mounted on private ships with enough powder and munitions to level a coastal town. Grapeshot in a cannon or other device could stop a charge of armed men or fend off attacks simply by it's presence on a field. Anyone who could afford could own & bear. This gave us our Liberty.

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

George Washington - January 8, 1790

First Annual Message to Congress, January 8, 1790:
http://www.pbs.org/georgewashington/collection/other_1790jan...

George Washington:

"...Among the many interesting objects which will engage your attention, that of providing for the common defence will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war, is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.

A "free people" ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end, a uniform and well digested plan is requisite: and "their" safety and interest "require that they should promote such manufactories" as tend to render "them" (THE PEOPLE) "independent" on others for "essential", "PARTICULARLY for MILITARY supplies"." ...."

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

Now Posting Articles on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/American-Patriot-Party-CC-Nat...

Educate Yourselves. Educate Others.
Link and Help to Promote us!

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Full Un-Paraphrased James Madison - Federalist #46

The Actual Quote text below of the above paraphrased segment should arouse citizens greatest fears and prompt a call of alarm;

Though the words James Madison speaks, shows that he establishes the correct fact of the powers of the citizen militia and limitations of the standing army, James Madison lacked the understanding, which Patrick Henry in the Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788 (Which See: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/americanpatriotpartynewsl...) clearly possessed with regard to understanding power and corruption;

The present danger correlating with what James Madison said could never happen - which in fact "has" happened, establishes an urgency that the counties and states whose representatives whom have not yet been corrupted or have not arrived at their present position in complete ignorance of their rights, duties and responsibilities, should now move to arm the citizens of all ages able to bear arms, to a 25 to 1 superior force to the standing army;

Those in the standing army, understanding their duty to the Constitution, should begin to relinquish their superiority and begin to transfer any and all their arms within the United States, not necessary to repel foreign invasion, to the Citizens and most local communities so that the balance of power be resumed; So to prevent themselves, and their families as well, from being enslaved;

And to prepare with local CITIZEN MILITIAS, who are even more so responsible in their Duty as free Citizens to increase their powers, to repel a move by foreign, national and international manipulators of power to infiltrate and control the standing army against the foundations established in the Original Constitutions and Common Law Principles of freedom.

The fears James Madison disregards, in his optimism of the sure limitations instituted by "delegated" powers set in the "ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION" which were never to be exceeded, have become in fact a reality of today.

Review the actual Quote from Federalist #46 below, then prepare.

Each man is responsible for his own freedom:

----------

Federalist #46: James Madison -
Complete Quote Text:
( http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa46.htm ):

James Madison: "...The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterrupted succession of men ready to betray both;

that THE "TRAITORS" should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment;

that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and " continue to supply the materials", "until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads", must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger.

The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men.

"TO THESE" (The United States Military) WOULD BE "OPPOSED" A (CITIZEN) "MILITIA" amounting to near half a million of "CITIZENS" with "ARMS IN THEIR HANDS", OFFICERED BY MEN CHOSEN FROM "AMONG THEMSELVES" (CHOSEN BY THE LOCAL CITIZEN'S - NOT MILITARY OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT), fighting for their (THE CITIZEN'S) common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their (THE CITIZEN MILITIA'S) affections and confidence.

It may well be doubted, whether a (CITIZEN) MILITIA "thus circumstanced" (25 to 1 ARMED POWER RATIO) could ever be conquered by such a (SMALL) proportion of "regular troops" (i.e. federal US ARMY, NAVY, AIR FORCE, MARINES).

Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it.

Besides the advantage of (THE CITIZENS) being armed, which the Americans (CITIZENS) possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of "subordinate governments", to which the people are attached, and by which the (CITIZEN) MILITIA officers are appointed (officered by men chosen among themselves), forms a barrier against the "enterprises of ambition", more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.

Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.

But were the people to "possess" the additional advantages of "LOCAL" governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the (CIVILIAN) militia, by these (LOCAL) governments, and attached both to them and to the (CITIZEN) MILITIA, it may be "affirmed with the greatest assurance", that the throne of "every tyranny in Europe" would be "speedily overturned" in spite of the legions which surround it.

Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in "ACTUAL POSSESSION", than the "debased subjects of arbitrary power" would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors.

Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the "long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it"."

APP: This should alarm any US Citizen, as our present condition of Citizens NOT armed with a 25 to 1 superiority over our own standing army; and the fact that our "Citizen Militias" officered by men "chosen among themselves" do NOT exist in any number near this in military capability or armament, is CLEAR EVIDENCE that the "long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it" have "ALREADY OCCURRED".

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

Now on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/American-Patriot-Party-CC-Nat...

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Inalienable.... See Declaration of Independence (Original Draft)

Declaration of Independence (Earlier Thomas Jefferson Draft):

"We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain (Inherent and) "INALIENABLE" rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

This is because they are inherent gift from God and not something that can be given up EVEN by the person possessing them (it is not an individual right). That goes along with not being able to be removed.

It means that an Inalienable (unalienable) Right Trumps even Individual Rights.

It is not that it is "prohibited" from being removed;...

It means it is "IMPOSSIBLE" to be removed.

Here Samuel Adams, in the Rights of the Colonists 1772, Describes this:

In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/Rights_of_the_Colonists/r...

"...In short it is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one or any number of men at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights when the great end of civil government from the very nature of its institution is for the support, protection and defence of those very rights: the principal of which as is before observed, are life liberty and property.

If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, "would absolutely vacate such renunciation"; the [Volume 5, Page 396] right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty,

>>>>>>>>it is "NOT in the POWER OF MAN" to alienate this gift, and VOLUNTARILY become a slave--..."

-------------

"Inalienable". Much stronger. Correct. :)

-------------

Here is a good list of versions I found with .jpg pictures of the parchments - Thought you may enjoy as it clears things up a bit:

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/unalienable.htm

"...Unalienable / Inalienable

The question is often asked, "Is the word in the Declaration of Independence unalienable or is it inalienable?"

The final version of the Declaration uses the word "unalienable." Some earlier drafts used the word "inalienable," which is the term our modern dictionaries prefer. The two words mean precisely the same thing.

According to The American Heritage Guide to Contemporary Usage and Style from Houghton Mifflin Company:

The unalienable rights that are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence could just as well have been inalienable, which means the same thing. Inalienable or unalienable refers to that which cannot be given away or taken away.

Here is a listing of known versions of the Declaration, showing which word is used:

1.) The Declaration on parchment, now in the Department of State unalienable

2.) The Declaration as written out in the corrected Journal unalienable

3.) The Declaration as printed by Dunlap under the order of Congress unalienable

4.) The draft of the Declaration in the handwriting of Jefferson now in The American Philosophical Society, in Philadelphia inalienable

5.) The Declaration in the handwriting of Jefferson now in the New York Public Library inalienable

6.) The draft of the Declaration in the handwriting of Jefferson now in the Massachusetts Historical Society, in Boston inalienable

7.) The copy in the handwriting of John Adams of the "Rough draught" of the Declaration, now at the Massachusetts Historical Society. unalienable

In a footnote in "The Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of Political Ideas" by Carl Lotus Becker, published 1922, we learn:

The Rough Draft reads "[inherent &] inalienable."

There is no indication that Congress changed "inalienable" to "unalienable"; but the latter form appears in the text in the rough Journal, in the corrected Journal, and in the parchment copy. John Adams, in making his copy of the Rough Draft, wrote " unalienable." Adams was one of the committee which supervised the printing of the text adopted by Congress, and it may have been at his suggestion that the change was made in printing. "Unalienable" may have been the more customary form in the eighteenth century ..."

So, we'll just do as they had done and use them both... ( and not be too hard on each other's choice :)

Maybe even throw in a "indefeasible rights" once in a while...(Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratifying convention 6-16-1788) just to stir things up a bit :)

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

Educate yourself, Educate Others.

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Unalienable vs inalienable is

Unalienable vs inalienable is a big and very important difference. Our documents use UNalienable for a reason.

Inalienable = can not be sold or transferred

Unalienable = can not be removed

Blessings )o(

Excellent

thanks for posting that!

Our family's journey from the Rocket City to the Redoubt: www.suburbiatosimplicity.com

Assault i.e. Military Styled Weapons are an INALIENABLE RIGHT.

Here is another quote that affirms the need for widespread "independent" arms manufacture for the "people" being prepared for any event and to have MILITARY styled arms:

First Annual Address to Congress, January 8, 1790.

"A free "PEOPLE" ought not only be armed but disciplined; to which end, a uniform and well digested plan is requisite: And their safety and interest "REQUIRE" that they should "PROMOTE" such manufactories, as tend to render THEM (i.e. THE PEOPLE) "independent on others" (i.e. Not be dependent upon others), for essential, particularly for MILITARY SUPPLIES."

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Washington_-_...

(see third paragraph)

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Got any sources on the 1790 gun registration?

That sounds really interesting, and informative...

Here's another of Richards posts on this subject

http://www.dailypaul.com/207980/militia-the-true-definition-...

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I've been looking but I've found not mention of that quote.

Or a federalist suggestion of registration. It would be great to have it verified but all I've found is it quoted in forums not the best sources.

I'm wondering if it's a misquote spread around the net...

Richard seems like the sort that checks his stuff

but, you can always take some of what's been attributed and search variations.. It's what I do.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

You're right. We have a

You're right. We have a natural right to conceal carry. We do not need permission to conceal a firearm.

Unalienable if you don't mind

.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Feel Free to Post this EVERYWHERE!

---

Educate Others - Email Everywhere. Keep it Bumped.

ALSO - Make sure to attend and Second Amendment Event this Friday, 10AM at Every State Capital in the United States.

->

Find Your state HERE: https://www.facebook.com/events/406312512782872

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Bump.

Bump.

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Got Drone?

Got Long Range?

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Got Cannon?

?

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.