Ben Franklin on Government...

[Jack Ryan]

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 

[BondJamesBond]

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

This quote gets beaten to death. The question is this...Just because he said it, was he correct? The average American gives up liberty for safety every day...that is unless you don't have any locks on your doors. Aren't you giving up liberty for safety when you buy a gun in the first place?

A lot of "Founding Fathers" said a lot of things.

Patrick Henry said "Give me liberty or give me death". James Madison said that Patrick Henry was a pompous blowhard who was long on words and short on action.

 

[AssMan]

This quote gets beaten to death. The question is this...Just because he said it, was he correct? The average American gives up liberty for safety every day...that is unless you don't have any locks on your doors. Aren't you giving up liberty for safety when you buy a gun in the first place?

A lot of "Founding Fathers" said a lot of things.

Patrick Henry said "Give me liberty or give me death". James Madison said that Patrick Henry was a pompous blowhard who was long on words and short on action.

I'm not sure I follow. How exactly am I giving up liberty for safety by owning a gun? Are you referring to an NICS check?

 

[BondJamesBond]

I'm not sure I follow. How exactly am I giving up liberty for safety by owning a gun? Are you referring to an NICS check?

It could be argued that you are giving up your liberty to live free from fear by buying a gun for safety...the same way you give up some of your liberty by locking your doors at night.

My point is not to argue liberty vs. safety. My point is that just because someone who lived in the 1770's said something, doesn't make it so. Whenever this quote was brought up in college classes, my response was always..."Was he correct?" That usually prompted silence.

 

[AssMan]

Gotcha. I guess anything can be argued...

It seems that in order to make that argument however, one must assume that I purchased a gun, motivated by fear and to ensure my safety. I'm just a recreational shooter and hobbyist. But I understand what you're saying.

 

[EL1227]

A Republic, if You Can Keep It"



Particularly the last 3 minutes.

 

[TheBulge]

You do not give up liberty to lock your door or buy a gun. You are actually exercising your liberty to do those things because "you" make the choice.
You cannot strip away your own liberty it is an impossibility.

 

[bobthefisher]

Particularly the last 3 minutes.

Cool vid, is there the full version somewhere? I think the guy does a rather good impression.

 

[Dan_G]

Great song from Frank Turner, a British artist that describes himself as a classic liberal or modern day libertarian.

 

[Knuckle66]

Particularly the last 3 minutes.

If we can keep it....

Most people don't even know that we are a constitutional republic, and not a democracy. Hell most people couldn't tell you the difference.

http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/NotDemocracy.html

It's a long read and the speech was given in 06 but it's still good.

 

[Venge]

It could be argued that you are giving up your liberty to live free from fear by buying a gun for safety...the same way you give up some of your liberty by locking your doors at night.

My point is not to argue liberty vs. safety. My point is that just because someone who lived in the 1770's said something, doesn't make it so. Whenever this quote was brought up in college classes, my response was always..."Was he correct?" That usually prompted silence.

Unlike the old MD legend, I don't understand what you're saying. Actually, let me dispense with the politesse; I do understand perfectly what you're saying, and I think it's nonsense.

You know that the deference given to this quote has nothing to do with the fact that it's "old," right?

It's easy to snark at these old quotes from dead men, but you do know that the same argument is used about the Constitution, right? "JES BECAZ IT WAZ RITTEN A LONG TIM AGO DON NOT MEK IT TRU" out of the dribbling corner of a slack jaw.

Well, the reason that's garbage is the same reason this is garbage: you assume it's given its due because it's an old quote. It's an easy mistake. The reason this is important is because it was said during a time when people understood the difference between being a subject and being sovereign, and died to attain that difference. Do you know the difference? Do I? Can we? The Constitution was drafted by these people also. That's why we give it the deference we do.

Against all odds we get to live in a great society. We have it too easy, so we snark at old quotes from dead men.

Instead of doing that, why don't you try to understand the spirit of the quote? It's not a scientific study in individual causality. It may surprise you to know that locking myself in my own cage on my own terms is an exercise of liberty. Your definition is silly and impractical. Are you suggesting that since I seal myself in a place, I inhibit my own liberty? I'll do you one better. If I'm not projecting my power at all times, I must not be asserting my liberty. If I'm not literally in all places at all times, I have limited myself! My GOD, I'm a slave to my own Newtonian limitations!

I bought some food today so I wouldn't die of starvation. I MUST BE RELINQUISHING MY ESSENTIAL LIBERTY AND AM A SLAVE TO MY APPETITES.

I bought a computer once so I could surf teh interenetz. I'M A SLAVE TO THIS TECHNOLOGY AND MY LIBERTY IS GONE.

Or, you know, learn something.

 

[Ungermc]

Liberty: noun

1. the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.

2. the power or scope to act as one pleases.

 

[briwayjones]

Unlike the old MD legend, I don't understand what you're saying. Actually, let me dispense with the politesse; I do understand perfectly what you're saying, and I think it's nonsense.

You know that the deference given to this quote has nothing to do with the fact that it's "old," right?

It's easy to snark at these old quotes from dead men, but you do know that the same argument is used about the Constitution, right? "JES BECAZ IT WAZ RITTEN A LONG TIM AGO DON NOT MEK IT TRU" out of the dribbling corner of a slack jaw.

Well, the reason that's garbage is the same reason this is garbage: you assume it's given its due because it's an old quote. It's an easy mistake. The reason this is important is because it was said during a time when people understood the difference between being a subject and being sovereign, and died to attain that difference. Do you know the difference? Do I? Can we? The Constitution was drafted by these people also. That's why we give it the deference we do.

Against all odds we get to live in a great society. We have it too easy, so we snark at old quotes from dead men.

Instead of doing that, why don't you try to understand the spirit of the quote? It's not a scientific study in individual causality. It may surprise you to know that locking myself in my own cage on my own terms is an exercise of liberty. Your definition is silly and impractical. Are you suggesting that since I seal myself in a place, I inhibit my own liberty? I'll do you one better. If I'm not projecting my power at all times, I must not be asserting my liberty. If I'm not literally in all places at all times, I have limited myself! My GOD, I'm a slave to my own Newtonian limitations!

I bought some food today so I wouldn't die of starvation. I MUST BE RELINQUISHING MY ESSENTIAL LIBERTY AND AM A SLAVE TO MY APPETITES.

I bought a computer once so I could surf teh interenetz. I'M A SLAVE TO THIS TECHNOLOGY AND MY LIBERTY IS GONE.

Or, you know, learn something.

Where's the "like" button?

 

[Knuckle66]

^^^^^^^ this!!!

 

[pcfixer]

[FONT=&quot]The Constitution is not a smorgasbord that we or our public servants get to pick and choose from. The oath to support the Constitution requires the Constitution be followed in its entirety, every time in every situation. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The attitude that we can restore the Constitution and the Republic by supporting parts of it and conceding parts of it or ignoring parts of it is an immoral violation of one's oath to support the Constitution. It is like negotiating with cannibals on how much of you they are going to eat for dinner. You will always come out on the short end of that deal. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]For the sake of Liberty,[/FONT]