Monday, May 06, 2013

Nearly Thirty Percent Say: We May Need An Armed Revolution

Nearly Thirty Percent Say: We May Need An Armed Revolution
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.  – Declaration of Independence, 1776, as reflected in the Second Amendment.  

By de Andréa
Monday, May 6, 2013

I have been talking about reaching this point in our willingness to accept oppression from government institutions for nearly 30 years; I guess banning the “Big Gulp” was finally more than free Americans could take.

People are beginning to consider the Federal Government the enemy, the truth be known, it has always been the enemy, that’s why we have the Federal Constitution to bind their evil hands!

According to a survey titled “Beliefs About Sandy Hook Cover-Up, Coming Revolution Underlie Divide On Gun Control, that has been put out by Fairleigh Dickinson University, nearly one third of American voters believe an “armed revolution” might be needed in the next few years in order to protect liberty in the United States.  It indicated that nearly three-quarters (73%) of Democrats say that Congress needs to pass new laws to protect the public from gun violence, but the views of Republicans are almost completely opposite: 65 percent don’t think new laws are necessary.  Overall, registered voters are divided over the need for new gun control legislation.  Fifty percent agree that some control is needed, with 39 percent who disagree.

Obviously there is quite a difference of opinion among voters about the role of guns in society, though the gun control advocates really are on the wrong side of the Second Amendment do to ignorance of history and the constitution.  However, this same poll found that 29 percent of Americans think that an armed revolution will be necessary within the next few years in order to protect the liberties, which are supposed to be protected under the US Constitution and upheld by those that swear an oath to support and defend it, but instead are in the process of undermining it.

These beliefs fall along party lines as well.  Only 18 percent of Democrats believe an armed revolution may be necessary, as opposed to 44 percent of Republicans and 27 percent of independents.  Still, those numbers slightly exceed the same numbers that were present during the War for Independence.  Historians have estimated that less than 30 percent of the colonists supported Independence from Great Britain, while 18 to 22 percent remained loyal to the Crown.  The remainder attempted to be neutral, until they had no other alternative.

The differences in views of gun legislation are really a function of differences in what people understand that the Second Amendment is for.  “If you truly believe an armed revolution is possible in the near future, you need weapons and you’re going to be wary about government efforts to take them away.” said Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson, and an analyst for the poll.

Cassino also said regarding bipartisan support for gun control, “If there was a bipartisan moment after Sandy Hook to pass gun control legislation, it’s past.  Partisan views have strongly re-asserted themselves, and there’s no sign that they’ll get any weaker.”

Amazingly there is whopping thirty-seven percent of Americans who actually believe that Sandy Hook was a complete enactment (a Reichstag) by the government in order to push gun control debate while 59 percent of Americans do not believe there was a conspiracy in Newtown, Connecticut.  I had some questions and I got some answers.  In fact, I’ve had so many people, who are normally the ones blasting the mainstream media, pointing the finger at NBC and the Today show claiming they were saying something different than came from the Connecticut State Police.  I suppose now we should really lend credibility to NBC?  Well…no not really!

While I don’t really trust the Federal government, I don’t believe the Sandy Hook shooting was a government conspiracy, unless one could say that advertising the school as totally vulnerable because it was a GUN FREE ZONE and is an invitation to kill little kids…well of course it is!  But I certainly do believe the despotic degenerates who are hell bent to disarm Americans and take every opportunity to advance their control agenda against free Americans, simply exploited this tragic event in order to push that despotic agenda, such as DiFi chomping at the bit just waiting and hoping something like Sandy Hook would happen.  But it didn’t work.  They fell flat on their collective faces as usual.

That doesn’t mean they aren’t going to be coming back with more gun legislation, as well as a plethora of other oppressive controlling legislation.  They most certainly are going to do that, as I have been saying for more years than I care to remember.

This leads me to a conclusion regarding an armed revolution as a last resort for which the Second Amendment was designed.  I truly believe the next step for the states is to begin secession.  I think it will not be long until that becomes a reality.  We’ve already seen petitions signed by citizens , now for every state in the Union and we know the White House’s response to that sentiment.  It was certinally not patriotic, what is was, was patronizing.  It was also presumptuous to think that when the States joined the Union that they didn’t think they had the right to withdraw from it.  Having just seceded from what they saw as a despotic, powerful central government that was too distant from its citizens, Americans were skeptical about giving too much power to any government other than that of their own states, where they could exercise more direct control.  To think they didn’t clearly hold to peacefully withdrawing is to divorce the Constitution from its historical context.  Eventually, it was the belief that the States did possess a right of secession that led to the War of Northern Aggression.  Despite the reason, note who demonstrated aggression.  It was not the Southern States, but Washington.

I’m not a prophet as I have been accused of, or the son of a prophet.  However, I know my American history and why it occurred, and if you look to 1774-1776 and the years running up to the Civil War of Northern Aggression I see a pattern.  Even though I side with those that do see an armed resistance in our future, I am always hopeful that we might be able to secede peacefully.  The only aggressors in a matter like that would be our creation, our creature, the Federal Government.(Watch a video, its really good!) Should they attempt to invade a peacefully seceded state, I would hope we would have learned a lesson and that we would stop Union troops at the borders of our state should they attempt such a measure, as they did in South Carolina under President Abraham Lincoln.  As always, I believe we should seek a peaceful resolution and secession could be that means.  States could then band together like we were, prior to the Constitution, under the Articles of Confederation ,  our first American Constitution, which allowed full local government in the state as an individual country.  FYI - This Constitutional balance of power in the Republic ended in 1913 with the passing of the 17th Amendment that took away any representation the states had in the Federal Government.  1913 was the turning point in American history that has led to the destruction of the American Free Republic, the undoing of the balance of powers and the centralization of oppressive power that we are experiencing today.  The Constitution limits the Central government to approximately 27 individual powers, today the Federal governments powers illegally reach into the thousands.  Yes we may need to start all over again…

THE BOTTOM LINE: If you want to know about the present and the future of America, try reading the history’ of America!

Thanks for listening – de Andréa

Copyright © 2013 by Bottom Line Publishing -  Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

No comments: