Gun Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Dual wields Mosin-Nagants
Joined
·
214 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Saw this on another forum i frequent.

"Marc Chung sends in a very interesting tidbit of information covering Arizona bill HCR 2034: ”
abolish federal government; state sovereignty”. More specifically the bill covers the situation in which the US government declares marshal law then Arizona will join with 34 or more (majority) of states and declare their own independence from the Union… interesting (especially with election time around the corner and conspiracies about that Bush/Cheney empire would do something in order to declare marshal law to avoid the election):

1. That when or if the President of the United States, the Congress of
the United States or any other federal agent or agency declares the
Constitution of the United States to be suspended or abolished, if the
President or any other federal entity attempts to institute martial
law or its equivalent without an official declaration in one or more
of the states without the consent of that state or if any federal
order attempts to make it unlawful for individual Americans to own
firearms or to confiscate firearms, the State of Arizona, when joined
by thirty-four of the other fifty states, declares as follows:

that the states resume all state powers delegated by the Constitution
of the United States and assume total sovereignty; that the states
re-ratify and re-establish the present Constitution of the United
States as the charter for the formation of a new federal government,
to be followed by the election of a new Congress and President and the
reorganization of a new judiciary, similarly following the precedent
and procedures of the founding fathers; that individual members of the
military return to their respective states and report to the Governor
until a new President is elected; that each state assume a negotiated,
prorated share of the national debt; that all land within the borders
of a state belongs to the state until sold or ceded to the central
government by the state’s Legislature and Governor; and that once
thirty-five states have agreed to form a new government, each of the
remaining fifteen be permitted to join the new confederation on
application."

And if you haven't heard about the federal law that allows Bush to declare martial law and become the dictator of the USA here is some information for you.

http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/911/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
that's awesome! i am a little confused on the wording, though. are they saying that 35 other states have already agreed to similar terms or that Arizona will only execute this plan IF another 35 states agree to similar action? if the former, is there a list?
 

·
10111011
Joined
·
2,988 Posts
It makes it sound like Arizona would like to secede, but only if the other 34 states do as well. Sounds unlikely Arizona will secede on its own, and rightfully so as they'd be taken over within a week.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,143 Posts
mattxander12 said:
It makes it sound like Arizona would like to secede, but only if the other 34 states do as well. Sounds unlikely Arizona will secede on its own, and rightfully so as they'd be taken over within a week.


yea - by Mexico!


:lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
i have still not been able to rationalize exactly how martial law would happen. if people here think its going to be like the movie the siege, they are very much mistaken.
 

·
10111011
Joined
·
2,988 Posts
The only way it would happen IMO would be like right now if we were to be immediately entered in a military conflict, i.e. some country makes an act of war against us on our homeland. Throwing a new president who doesn't fully know the ropes into the mix would be near suicide. So the move to make would to be to suspend the elections, and the only way I know of to do that is to suspend the constitution aka martial law.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
On tha day of 9/11 and the three days there after this country was for all intents and purposes under Marshall Law conditioning without as much being stated in so many words.
Further same occurred in the days after Pearl Harbor.

Now FFWD imagine some major natural disaster were tohit such as say the theorized super tsunami that is figured/prdicted to this the east coast per a gigantic earthquake in the Atlantic...or that mega volcano that sits in the middle of the country suddenly going live. That woulds most definitely result in a national state of emergency (again 9/11 and Pearl Harbor) followed by Marshall Law to quell insurrection, maintain order, and basically because IMHO a majority of Americans will want and beg for as much out of _fear_.

I personally can see Marshall Law occurring in America even regionally pretty easily, especially so with how many people are in psychology these days.

- Janq
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
339 Posts
Awesome law. I have no problem with this. I'd love it even more if California got in on it, but that will *never* happen. And if it did, they would probably take the opportunity to sneak in bits of law to hose the rest of our 2nd Amendment rights.
 

·
Fanatical Feline
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
mattxander12 said:
It makes it sound like Arizona would like to secede, but only if the other 34 states do as well. Sounds unlikely Arizona will secede on its own, and rightfully so as they'd be taken over within a week.
AZ has the largist population of Class 3 owners :lol:

Also, BADASS law! I want that here...
 

·
00000
Joined
·
2,829 Posts
Janq said:
On tha day of 9/11 and the three days there after this country was for all intents and purposes under Marshall Law conditioning without as much being stated in so many words.
Further same occurred in the days after Pearl Harbor.

Now FFWD imagine some major natural disaster were tohit such as say the theorized super tsunami that is figured/prdicted to this the east coast per a gigantic earthquake in the Atlantic...or that mega volcano that sits in the middle of the country suddenly going live. That woulds most definitely result in a national state of emergency (again 9/11 and Pearl Harbor) followed by Marshall Law to quell insurrection, maintain order, and basically because IMHO a majority of Americans will want and beg for as much out of _fear_.

I personally can see Marshall Law occurring in America even regionally pretty easily, especially so with how many people are in psychology these days.

- Janq
As some people see it, marshal law is insurrection. When an unpopular government imposes marshal law without due process, and without respect for the Constitution.... what else would you call it? Insurrection.

It would be secession only in the sense that the "real" USA would be withdrawing from an enemy domestic occupying force.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
Kart,

Agreed Martial Law is a form of 'insurrection', but it is not the only type...by relevant to a nation/State definition.
As relevant to this thread insurrection as in the people going into a state of or near unchecked lawlessness. As well insurrection against the government as it represents the 'people' and public safety.

People are soft, real soft mentally and emotionally, and easily bamboozled and controlled by disinformation. The govt. does and has been doing this for over a century and is well practiced at training we monkeys to stay within our cages and not draw outside the lines.

I could see Marshall Law being referred to by the govt. as some other marketing dept. generated name to have the same meaning even as it may by otherwise normal definition mean something else completely (i.e. see Bush era "rebate" being used as a synonym for 'refund' in regard to the IRS).
In the US such case would be termed nationally as a "State of Emergency" rather than calling it martial law, which is exactly what happened after 9/11 and Pearl Harbor as well as is what occurred regionally across the US the day of and day after the shooting of MLK in '68.

- Janq
 

·
00000
Joined
·
2,829 Posts
Janq, you are spot on as usual. "states of emegency" are vaguely defined, just as the term "martial law" is. I support our federal government stepping up in certain cases... and hopefully secession happy states won't use that as an excuse.

I see secession as a distant SHTF contingency in order to PRESERVE the union. In other words, if DC is kidnapped by ninjas, the several states resolve to be bad enough dudes to restart our national government without them.

As a govt guy myself, I swore an oath to defent the Constitution... not the current ruling junta. However as long as the people in charge derive their authority legally from the Constitution, they are my bosses.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
kartoffel said:
...I support our federal government stepping up in certain cases... and hopefully secession happy states won't use that as an excuse.

I see secession as a distant SHTF contingency in order to PRESERVE the union. In other words, if DC is kidnapped by ninjas, the several states resolve to be bad enough dudes to restart our national government without them.

As a govt guy myself, I swore an oath to defent the Constitution... not the current ruling junta. However as long as the people in charge derive their authority legally from the Constitution, they are my bosses.
Agreed 100%.

In fact over the last two hours as I work, on a proposal toward government work, in the back of my mind I have been thinking about America, my family, and this election upcoming...and all the disinformation and distractive ploys employed by both sides as well as the media too.

As to this threads subject matter including my thoughts to that end and to that why I am currently leaning toward McCain does to my own view and perception (which are two different things), mindset, and personal position resolve at one central point of base at that of the United States of America 'Presidential Oath of Office';

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Source - http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/pihtml/pioaths.html
We here within the US of A who call ourselves 'American' or think of ourselves as being American (nationalized immigrants) should and must act toward assisting and enabling via a singular action and that is to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States".
If we do not do that then we individually are traitors to our country, our people, and our families, and ourselves. Collectively and as governed by our individual regional and state Representatives we are expected to do same.
I personally applaud Arizona for adopting this resolution although it should not be an item of concern or requirement. Why? Because our government, and Congress, and President, and Representatives are required by law and personal oath of office/position/job tasking to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Sadly in the real non theoretical world Arizona has felt a need to state what they have and enough Citizens therein agreed that it came to pass as state law.
That is because they, the state of Arizonain specific, amongst other Citizens do not trust our supreme level leader, leadership, nor even the Supreme Court to honor in full faith the promise they've made to Arizona in specific muchless us all by taking the oath of office. That makes me as an American citizen have feelings of sadness.

But then realistically after seeing what we have over the past eight years alone muchless the written and verbally stated statements of the contendors current from both major sides toward the next Presidential administration I cannot at all blame Arizona and it's citizens for having concern to such a degree that they would pass as state law a notification to the country that if Uncle Sam turns to a further shade of grey including denying their oath to the reserve, protect and defend Constitution that they will secede. Albeit at the concession that there is a majority consensus of other states who feel same in view, perception, mindset, and position.

- Janq

"Even if I want to take them [firearms] away, I don’t [today] have the votes in Congress." - Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), February 27, 2008, Duryea, PA
Source - http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/05/obama-im-not-going-to-take-your-guns-away/

"I will close Guantanamo. I will restore habeas corpus. And we will end torture and rendition because you will have elected a president who has taught the Constitution and believes in the Constitution and will obey the Constitution of the United States of America." - Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), February 27, 2008, Duryea, PA
Source - http://irregulartimes.com/index.php...ck-obama-speech-in-columbus-february-27-2008/

"[Obama campaign] believes that we can recognize and respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the right of local communities to enact common sense laws to combat violence and save lives. Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional." - The Obama for President campaign, November 20, 2007
Source - http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/06/obama-camp-disa.html

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." - The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, March 4, 1789
Source - http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top