Fix NICs Act..

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby Werz » Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:46 am

schmieg wrote:
bignflnut wrote:
Werz wrote:
Yeah, pretty clearly contrary to the First Amendment. Some of us believe in the whole Bill of Rights.


I believe you found that quote here under point 5. Hamilton Abert Long believes that what he has stated gives rise to the entire Bill of Rights. He's laying the philosophical foundation for the 1st Amendment and others. He's displaying the well, where the Liberties we enjoy spring from. He finds no contradiction in binding Congress from making an official religion (as this was the reason for fleeing their former Homeland) and believing in a Law-Giver outside of humanity. In fact, he insists on both.

In fact, the insistence is what runs afoul the First Amendment.

Exactly. It is the same insistence which governs the Islamic State.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK
Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
User avatar
Werz
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 5495
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 2:37 am

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby bignflnut » Mon Nov 27, 2017 9:35 am

It's not the merger of State and Religion. It's a one way street.
Perhaps this analogy will help: A boat is to be in the water, but water is not to be in the boat.
Similarly, religion will permeate the State, though the State should not permeate religion. The question is which religion will permeate the state, and what will be the high power past which there is no appeal?

See the Northwest Ordinance (2nd Continental Congress)
Art 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.


Perhaps Washington's inaugural address?
Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the public summons, repaired to the present station; it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official Act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the Universe, who presides in the Councils of Nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that his benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the People of the United States, a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes: and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success, the functions allotted to his charge. In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own; nor those of my fellow-citizens at large, less than either. No People can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States. Every step, by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency. And in the important revolution just accomplished in the system of their United Government, the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities, from which the event has resulted, cannot be compared with the means by which most Governments have been established, without some return of pious gratitude along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past seem to presage. These reflections, arising out of the present crisis, have forced themselves too strongly on my mind to be suppressed. You will join with me I trust in thinking, that there are none under the influence of which, the proceedings of a new and free Government can more auspiciously commence.


Washington's Farewell Address is compelling:
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?


1st Amendment, though, is not much of an argument. Referencing the Islamic State is simply silly.
Answer Washington's riddle:
Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ?
“A free people claim their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”
-Thomas Jefferson, 1774

Tweed Ring: "...we should have all done more to elected Republicans..." Agreed
User avatar
bignflnut
 
Posts: 5781
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby schmieg » Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:30 am

The freedom to choose one's belief includes the right to choose non-belief. Would you then make it a criminal offense not to believe in a higher power?
-- Mike

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
User avatar
schmieg
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 4939
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Madeira, Ohio

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby bignflnut » Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:03 pm

schmieg wrote:The freedom to choose one's belief includes the right to choose non-belief. Would you then make it a criminal offense not to believe in a higher power?


Of course not. That would be antithetical to the concepts I'm supporting.

I'm asserting that the statement
"You have an inalienable right under the First Amendment not to believe in God or a Creator."
made earlier is contradictory as unalienable Rights flow from a religious philosophical presupposition. That the belief in the concept of unalienable Rights is a product of religious belief that gives rise to the 1st Amendment (and others). To divorce the concept of unalienable Rights from Religious belief in the supremacy of spiritual matters is antithetical to the concept of Liberty as expressed in the founding documents of the nation. That without a spiritual religious philosophy underpinning justice, all declarations are mere preference, such as cuisine- carrying no moral OUGHT.

Whereas The Pilgrims / Founders held a Religious Belief in a Creator (see Mayflower Compact and other pre-US Constitution documents)
Whereas This Religious Belief gave rise to the legal concept of Natural, preexisting, unalienable Rights in many realms, particularly regarding religious belief.
Whereas The State is not to rule the conscience of the people, but to uphold these unalienable Rights ("That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men...")
Resolved, There Shall Be no Government compulsion to individual belief in a particular religion.
“A free people claim their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”
-Thomas Jefferson, 1774

Tweed Ring: "...we should have all done more to elected Republicans..." Agreed
User avatar
bignflnut
 
Posts: 5781
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby WY_Not » Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:18 pm

Rights are not inherent to belief in, do not require belief in, and do not originate from religion or even in some higher power. Rights are inherent within the individual by virtue of simply being human. Every individual has the rights outlined in the BoR and infinitely more. The BoR does not grant the individual anything; it tells Government where it may not tread. Governments and other individuals may infringe upon the rights of others and prevent them from exercising those rights but those rights still exist; they can not be legislated away. My rights are not dependent upon anyone else's belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Zeus, or any other deity.

bignflnut wrote:
schmieg wrote:The freedom to choose one's belief includes the right to choose non-belief. Would you then make it a criminal offense not to believe in a higher power?


Of course not. That would be antithetical to the concepts I'm supporting.

I'm asserting that the statement
"You have an inalienable right under the First Amendment not to believe in God or a Creator."
made earlier is contradictory as unalienable Rights flow from a religious philosophical presupposition. That the belief in the concept of unalienable Rights is a product of religious belief that gives rise to the 1st Amendment (and others). To divorce the concept of unalienable Rights from Religious belief in the supremacy of spiritual matters is antithetical to the concept of Liberty as expressed in the founding documents of the nation. That without a spiritual religious philosophy underpinning justice, all declarations are mere preference, such as cuisine- carrying no moral OUGHT.

Whereas The Pilgrims / Founders held a Religious Belief in a Creator (see Mayflower Compact and other pre-US Constitution documents)
Whereas This Religious Belief gave rise to the legal concept of Natural, preexisting, unalienable Rights in many realms, particularly regarding religious belief.
Whereas The State is not to rule the conscience of the people, but to uphold these unalienable Rights ("That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men...")
Resolved, There Shall Be no Government compulsion to individual belief in a particular religion.
Learn how Project Appleseed is supporting freedom through Marksmanship and Heritage clinics.

Samuel Adams wrote:If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
User avatar
WY_Not
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 10:15 pm
Location: Miami County, OH

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby Werz » Mon Nov 27, 2017 6:49 pm

bignflnut wrote:Washington's Farewell Address is compelling:
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

Equally compelling are statements from other Founders:

Image
Image

The First Amendment is the argument. You have a right to believe as you wish and to govern your life by those beliefs. You have zero right to expect others to adopt your beliefs, to have the government enforce your beliefs, or to deny a claim of patriotism by those who do not share your beliefs.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK
Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
User avatar
Werz
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 5495
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 2:37 am

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby Javelin Man » Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:07 pm

schmieg wrote:The freedom to choose one's belief includes the right to choose non-belief. Would you then make it a criminal offense not to believe in a higher power?


This would be like it being a criminal offense to not own a gun due to the Second Amendment.
Famous last words: "I just drank What?!-Socrates

bruh bruh is slang for "complete and total moron" -sodbuster95

The following is a list of children's books that didn't quite make it to the printing press...
1. What Is That Dog Doing to That Other Dog?
2. Daddy Drinks Because You Cry
3. You Were An Accident
4. Bi-Curious George
Javelin Man
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 6709
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Sandusky County

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby schmieg » Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:19 pm

Javelin Man wrote:
schmieg wrote:The freedom to choose one's belief includes the right to choose non-belief. Would you then make it a criminal offense not to believe in a higher power?


This would be like it being a criminal offense to not own a gun due to the Second Amendment.

Maybe he's on to something here. :D
-- Mike

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
User avatar
schmieg
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 4939
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Madeira, Ohio

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby bignflnut » Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:47 am

Werz wrote:Equally compelling are statements from other Founders:

The First Amendment is the argument. You have a right to believe as you wish and to govern your life by those beliefs. You have zero right to expect others to adopt your beliefs, to have the government enforce your beliefs, or to deny a claim of patriotism by those who do not share your beliefs.


I hope you'll excuse me for not being swayed by a compilation of un-sourced, out of context "quotes".

Who said anything about government enforcing my beliefs, or expecting others to adopt my beliefs? (Shoot the messenger, make it about him)This is what the Pilgrims fled. They didn't like the government overrunning the church or compelling belief. Chris Tucker?

Here are well researched quotes from the Jefferson Memorial (they're etched in stone, like they're important):
"For in a warm climate, no man will labour for himself who can make another labour for him. This is so true, that of the proprietors of slaves a very small proportion indeed are ever seen to labor. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever . . . ." - Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII5


"Well aware that the opinions and belief of men depend not on their own will, but follow involuntarily the evidence proposed to their minds; that Almighty God hath created the mind free, and manifested his supreme will that free it shall remain by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments, or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion..."


Somehow, Jefferson could hold these two concepts concurrently: That Liberty is a gift from God and that government should not compel belief. Some would dispose of the former although it births the later.
“A free people claim their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”
-Thomas Jefferson, 1774

Tweed Ring: "...we should have all done more to elected Republicans..." Agreed
User avatar
bignflnut
 
Posts: 5781
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby schmieg » Tue Nov 28, 2017 2:05 pm

bignflnut wrote:
Somehow, Jefferson could hold these two concepts concurrently: That Liberty is a gift from God and that government should not compel belief. Some would dispose of the former although it births the later.

So one who has no belief in a god can come to the conclusion that government should not compel belief?
-- Mike

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
User avatar
schmieg
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 4939
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Madeira, Ohio

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby bignflnut » Tue Nov 28, 2017 3:06 pm

schmieg wrote:
bignflnut wrote:
Somehow, Jefferson could hold these two concepts concurrently: That Liberty is a gift from God and that government should not compel belief. Some would dispose of the former although it births the later.

So one who has no belief in a god can come to the conclusion that government should not compel belief?


They CAN, but they won't be able to argue for that conclusion on their own worldview (they'll borrow from religion eventually, undermining their declared disbelief). Without a "Great Legislator" or a transcendent view of justice that exists outside of time and above humanity, the debate comes down to mere preference. Why should messenger A's preference be greater or lesser than Messenger B's? So while people CAN argue the different appeals of flavors of ice cream, the discussion carries little weight. Why is anything wrong if there is no such thing as justice? However, when you declare freedom self-evident via birth by decree of your Creator, personal preference (your own or that of another) is rather moot. The controlling principle isn't within humanity's ability to legislate, corrupt, or vote upon.

My opinion on the right of Expatriation has been so long ago as the year 1776. consigned to record in the Act of the Virginia code, drawn by myself recognising the right expressly, & prescribing the mode of exercising it. the evidence of this natural right, like that of our right to life, liberty, the use of our faculties, the pursuit of happiness, is not left to the feeble and sophistical investigations of reason but is impressed on the sense of every man. we do not claim these under the Charter of kings or legislators; but under the king of kings[.] if he has made it a law in the nature of man to pursue his own happiness, he has left him free in the choice of place as well as mode: and we may safely call on the whole body of English Jurists to produce the map on which Nature has traced, for each individual, the geographical line which she forbids him to cross in pursuit of happiness. it certainly does not exist in his mind. where then is it? I believe too I might safely affirm that there is not another nation, civilized or savage which has ever denied this natural right. I doubt if there is another which refuses it’s exercise. I know it is allowed in some of the most respectable countries of continental Europe; nor have I ever heard of one in which it was not. how it is among our savage neighbors, who have no law but that of Nature, we all know.


Here Jefferson is providing a basis for the moral OUGHT that is the foundation of his belief. Without this foundation, I'm not certain how one asserts much of anything regarding Liberty, Life, the nature of man, etc. Jefferson calls this attempt "the feeble and sophistical investigations of reason". Clearly, some have always been willing to make the attempt.

Jefferson (in previous quotes) said that men can't be compelled by government to think one way or another... or at all, I suppose. It is folly to use force to compel thought.
“A free people claim their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”
-Thomas Jefferson, 1774

Tweed Ring: "...we should have all done more to elected Republicans..." Agreed
User avatar
bignflnut
 
Posts: 5781
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby djthomas » Tue Nov 28, 2017 3:49 pm

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, it looks like the House Judiciary committee is scheduled to do markup on this bill along with the national reciprocity bill tomorrow at 10:00 AM. Supposedly there's a way to watch online. Hopefully I can figure that out and work it in around my business meetings.
Never ask if you can carry at a non-posted place, but always ask why you cannot at one that is!
Just because they offer call ahead seating doesn't mean you call ahead for carry permission.
User avatar
djthomas
 
Posts: 5735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Location: Medina County

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby djthomas » Wed Nov 29, 2017 11:50 am

djthomas wrote:Meanwhile, back at the ranch, it looks like the House Judiciary committee is scheduled to do markup on this bill along with the national reciprocity bill tomorrow at 10:00 AM. Supposedly there's a way to watch online. Hopefully I can figure that out and work it in around my business meetings.

The antis are having a field day. Strong showing of speeches from the (D)s and lots of red MDA shirts in the front row of the gallery.
Never ask if you can carry at a non-posted place, but always ask why you cannot at one that is!
Just because they offer call ahead seating doesn't mean you call ahead for carry permission.
User avatar
djthomas
 
Posts: 5735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Location: Medina County

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby djthomas » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:29 pm

Amendment to allow federal judges to carry anywhere passed. Next up an amendment to allow members of Congress to carry anywhere...

Reps Nadler(NY), Cicciline(RI), Lofgren (CA), Deutch (FL), and Jackson Lee (TX) are leading the overall resistance.

The red shirt moms are looking grumpier and grumpier each time they show the clerk calling the roll.
Never ask if you can carry at a non-posted place, but always ask why you cannot at one that is!
Just because they offer call ahead seating doesn't mean you call ahead for carry permission.
User avatar
djthomas
 
Posts: 5735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Location: Medina County

Re: Fix NICs Act..

Postby djthomas » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:44 pm

High capacity mag ban defeated. Two fewer moms in the audience and those left seem to be playing candy crush on their phones.
Never ask if you can carry at a non-posted place, but always ask why you cannot at one that is!
Just because they offer call ahead seating doesn't mean you call ahead for carry permission.
User avatar
djthomas
 
Posts: 5735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Location: Medina County

PreviousNext

Return to National Firearm Politics & Legislation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests