Is it a settled question whether the right to armed revolution against a constitutionally elected government is present in the constitution?

31 views
Skip to first unread message

S K

unread,
Jul 21, 2022, 10:24:23 AMJul 21
to
Scalia seems to have opened the door to say "yes", but congressman Jamie Raskin begs to differ:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEJmo0PcGVY

John Levine

unread,
Jul 22, 2022, 1:01:46 AMJul 22
to
According to S K <skpf...@gmail.com>:
>Scalia seems to have opened the door to say "yes", but congressman Jamie Raskin begs to differ:

Anyone with an elementary school level of reading comprehension knows
that it isn't but unfortunately we have six justices who see all sorts
of things in the Constitution that no judge saw there before.

--
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

RichD

unread,
Jul 24, 2022, 2:22:29 AMJul 24
to
On July 21, John Levine wrote:
>>Scalia seems to have opened the door to say "yes", but congressman Jamie Raskin begs to differ:
>
> Anyone with an elementary school level of reading comprehension knows
> that it isn't

Let me call on my elementary school literacy -
"...being necessary to the security of a Free state"

"Free state", hmmmmm.... synonymous with sovereign state, yes/no? And
should the federal gubmit prove oppressive, that would derogate the "free"
bit, would it not? Hence the "free state" should have the means to preserve
its freedom, by effecting its sovereignty, via its militia, should it not?

Or did the framers intend that phrase to be ignored, as inconvenient and enigmatic?


--
Rich

Stuart O. Bronstein

unread,
Jul 24, 2022, 11:41:06 AMJul 24
to
And it's up to each of us individually to determine of the State is
"free" and attack it with deadly weapons if we don't think it's free
enough? So you're saying that I can kill politicians I don't like,
with impunity because I think they're making the state less free than
I would want? Wow.


--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

RichD

unread,
Jul 25, 2022, 4:54:24 PMJul 25
to
On July 24, Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
>> "...being necessary to the security of a Free state"
>> "Free state", hmmmmm.... synonymous with sovereign state, yes/no?
>> And should the federal gubmit prove oppressive, that would
>> derogate the "free" bit, would it not? Hence the "free state"
>> should have the means to preserve its freedom, by effecting its
>> sovereignty, via its militia, should it not?
>> Or did the framers intend that phrase to be ignored, as
>> inconvenient and enigmatic?
>
> And it's up to each of us individually to determine of the State is
> "free" and attack it with deadly weapons if we don't think it's free
> enough? So you're saying that I can kill politicians I don't like,
> with impunity because I think they're making the state less free than
> I would want? Wow.

"He won the battle over himself. He loved Big Brother."
- G. Orwell: "1984"

--
Rich

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages