Lysander Spooner observed that the Constitution either created the government that we now have or was powerless to prevent it.
The reason the Constitution has become a toothless tiger is because it has failed to protect us from the abuse of power by the ruling class. It has failed because we let it.
The Constitution is only as strong as the people's determination to be free. If the people want to be free they must take the responsibility to hold elected officials accountable. If they fail to do so the elected officials will continue to violate the Constitution without consequences. It is not the Constitution that needs to be held responsible, it is the people. Unless we insist that the rulebook is followed we will continue being slaves in the land of the free. As long as we allow it they will continue passing legislation which will benefit their friends at the expense of the people.
Only a moral and virtuous people are capable of freedom and due to apathy, ignorance and neglect we gave squandered the gift of liberty which was purchased with the blood of our ancestors; American and otherwise.
The problem is that whenever government is created, the vast majority of the people become subject/slaves to a ruling class. In any society where the people do not posess equal rights and treatment under the law, there will always be masters and slaves. Today the representatives of the financial elite write the laws and the rest of us are expected to comply and when we do we our giving our consent.
When God gave us liberty he also required that we govern ourselves or be ruled by tyrants. George Washington once said "Government is like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
He realized that if a government was not confined to its proper role it would become a tyrannical force which would destroy rather than defend the rights of the people.
Replies
This seems to be a change in thinking from some of your previous posts, but a welcome change.
If the Constitution is a toothless tiger, then it is the states and the people who are responsible to put teeth into it. We must learn the Constitution, then demand adherence to it.
This is why I say the Constitution is the Solution.
Two things must be done:
"The Lesser Magistrate Doctrine teaches that when the superior or higher ranking civil authority makes immoral/unjust laws or policies, the lower or lesser ranking civil authority has both a right and duty to refuse obedience to that superior authority. If necessary, the lesser authorities may even actively resist the higher authority."
Get the book and read The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrate ! Also available at this site is The Magedeburg Confession "...an important historical work that became the first in the history of mankind to set forth in a doctrinal format what only later came to be known as the Lesser Magistrate Doctrine."
The Constitution is not the solution, it is the people standing behind it that give it the capacity to protect us. The Constitution can only be the solution if the people are willing to take the responsibility to hold the elected officials accountable.
As long as Irresponsible voters continue to elect unethical men and women to Congress, the Constitution will continue to be powerless.
Whether the Constitution supports liberty or tyranny depends entirely upon who is charge. If the bankers and the financial elite are in control it will promote tyranny, but if the people are calling the shots it can be the solution.
The constitution of 1776 (Declaration of Independence) was written in defense of Liberty by people forced to do so under extreme victimization by organized criminals who called themselves The British.
Under that idea (American Dream) a number of people also wrote State Constitutions.
The authorities who became authorities under extreme victimization by organized criminals calling themselves The British also wrote a Statute that governed a Federal Union of Independent States and that was called The Articles of Confederation.
So...the Federal government existed before 1776 proven by the Declaration of Independence that was written by those authorities who proved their authority as those authorities drove out The British criminal armies from the Independent States.
People speaking of "The Constitution" of 1787 appear to be either ignorant of the facts or intentionally misleading the facts.
Which is it?
The Constitution has not been the solution past and never will be unless the people rally around it. Amending the Constitution will not fix the problem. The ruling class will continue to violate any new amendments just as they have in the past.
Responsible individuals were created by God to rule themselves not to be subjects of a ruling class.
Thanks for the links and the information. The "just following (criminal) orders" falsehood (deception) is precisely what it is each time someone, somewhere, offers that lie as a cover-up for their willful crimes.
http://www.americanantiquarian.org/proceedings/44539282.pdf
In that link are similar messages concerning an obvious demarcation line (no grey area) between right and wrong.
Bastiat wrote that if the law was constrained to its original limitations, it would make no difference who was elected. I agree. If a critical mass of informed and virtuous people held a vigilant position over government agencies (and there would, by necessity, be a very few in number) Barney Fife could be an effective agent for the government. The question is, what is that critical mass: 3% is my guess.
I agree with Robert and if the Constitution is the “tool”, the people must learn how to apply the principals that will make the courts sustain the proper remedy to protect one’s rights.
Specifically it is the 4th Amendment we are talking about when we use the “constitution” as the tool. It is the foundation of the statutes that are provided for the defendant in order to “suppress” any evidence that was obtained without a warrant or probable cause.
However, going to this argument or issue is premature if one is going to be able to sustain their objection to an unreasonable search or seizure. First it is incumbent upon the accused to find out if in fact the search or seizure was unreasonable.
The statute in California is 1538.5, and it says that any search or seizure (arrest) without a warrant is PRESUMED to be unreasonable! Yet, this PRESUMPTION comes after the cop (agent) PRESUMED that he/she had the “probable cause” to make an arrest and detention, with or without a warrant.
So at this stage with the cop presuming he has probable cause to make an arrest, and you the accused, presuming but really knowing (at least pretty sure) that there is NO probable cause, we need a legal (judicial) determination. Here is where it takes action by the accused in order to sustain the right.
ONLY MAGISTRATES can determine probable cause, not the cop, and not you. Unless and until the magistrate is asked to determine probable cause, and he makes a determination (They really try to avoid making this decision), IT WILL BE PRESUMED THAT THE COP HAS IT. This presumption will continue FOREVER, and it is the basis for all the “losses” we face.
Once a magistrate determines probable cause, based upon the complaint and surrounding paper work, without any evidence or argument, the statements in the paperwork can be challenged for mistakes. Mistakes like alleging “driving” when one was actually “traveling”. These challenges can be brought at a hearing for probable cause, after the magistrate makes his/her determination.
Neither the Constitution or laws need to be changed. The individual must take action within the confines of the Constitution and laws because the system really is set up for us to have liberty and freedom if we pursue it.
Who and what army claims these claims made here and now? It appears as if people merely pick from a hat and then that (according to them) is law.
"ONLY MAGISTRATES can determine probable cause, not the cop, and not you."
Why was the 5th Amendment added to that so called Constitution of 1787?
What does the word no mean?
Lori, I opened the Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrate. I agree. I wonder what came first the doctrine or Thomas Jefferson's quote "Rebellion to tyranny is obedience to God".
Do you have a list of Bible scriptures that direct us to the 4 realms of government authority?
Thanks
PS I learned about the Doctrine of Chances from the Ohio Attorney General this summer in a case they were prosecuting against a lawyer for criminal charges. Applying that every civilization has roughly a 200 yr existence throughout history. What makes us think our "Chances" are any different?
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next