• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the United States Nearing a Civil War?

Is the United States Nearing a Civil War?

  • Yes, Any further Obama backed Legislation might cause a Civil War.

    Votes: 4 3.7%

  • Maybe, It matters what happens in the near future.

    Votes: 21 19.4%

  • No, The U.S. is not nearing a Civil War.

    Votes: 70 64.8%

  • Somewhat, People like Alex Jones will cause the nation to further split along their opinion lines.

    Votes: 2 1.9%

  • Not Possibly, This is just a small uproar that will soon pass over.

    Votes: 11 10.2%
  • Total voters
    108
  • Poll closed .
Henrin said:
How do you think you would fight the government at this point? You can very well go face to face against them you know.
Click to expand...

I woudn't *fight* the government. There is a forum for civil discourse, and a way to affect change and reform. The political process has not collapsed.

Henrin said:
Are you aware we are dealing with more than the people that fought the American revolution did? Did they insult all these oppressed people too?
Click to expand...

During the American Revolution, the political process did collapse. There was no way for redress. There is today. Whenever the process collapses, then we can start looking at revolution and resistance. But it's highly unlikely that'll happen to the United States now. Big difference from Revolutionary times.
 
Isn't it funny that those who crow the loudest about the constitution are the ones who threaten violence instead of following the constitutionally created methods for change?
 
Redress said:
Isn't it funny that those who crow the loudest about the constitution are the ones who threaten violence instead of following the constitutionally created methods for change?
Click to expand...

All the while claiming it's in defense of the Constitution...
 
Redress said:
Isn't it funny that those who crow the loudest about the constitution are the ones who threaten violence instead of following the constitutionally created methods for change?
Click to expand...

I agree with that for the large part, however, in a few things we're beyond what constitutional amendment can addresss. The court will just neuter whatever change is made by interpretting it falsely. In fact, that's a good part of the issue now. Take copyright law and the public domain. SCOTUS has destroyed the framer's intent on that one and no amendment to the constitution can address that.
 
Redress said:
Isn't it funny that those who crow the loudest about the constitution are the ones who threaten violence instead of following the constitutionally created methods for change?
Click to expand...

How do you get a country to follow their constitution by using the very constitution they are ignoring?
 
Henrin said:
How do you get a country to follow their constitution by using the very constitution they are ignoring?
Click to expand...

If you really feel that way, call a lawyer. It'll take some time, but you'll get your day in court eventually. You should get started, the court won't be conservative for long. That's funny isn't it? There's been some complaining about the courts on the last page, yet the court is conservative.

You know, it's entirely possible that you're wrong. Have you considered that?
 
repeter said:
If you really feel that way, call a lawyer. It'll take some time, but you'll get your day in court eventually. You should get started, the court won't be conservative for long. That's funny isn't it? There's been some complaining about the courts on the last page, yet the court is conservative.
Click to expand...

So I'm supposed go to court to complain about the court? That makes no sense.

You know, it's entirely possible that you're wrong. Have you considered that?
Click to expand...

Except I'm not. :D
 
Henrin said:
So I'm supposed go to court to complain about the court? That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

You're saying that they aren't adhering to the Constitution. So, pick a law you think violates the Constitution, and start working up the legal ladder. If you disagree with their holding, well too bad. Their word is mostly final.

Unless you're saying you think the SCOTUS itself is violating the Constitution. If that's the case, well, it's still too damned bad for you. If they were going to agree with you, I'd imagine it would be now, when the court is conservative. If you still don't agree with them, I'd suggest re-evaluating your positions on issues.

Henrin said:
Except I'm not. :D
Click to expand...

:doh
 
spud_meister said:
Yes. Obama is secretly encouraging a civil war, and he will use the war to get emergency powers from the Senate, towards the end of the war he will be horribly scarred in an assassination attempt by Seal Team 6 after they learn his secret plan. Once the war is over, he will declare the US to be a Galactic Empire.
Click to expand...

Wait I saw that movie :p
 
Expect to see more places like Hilton Head where every community is gated, most with their own security, and some of them have their own fire departments just to keep people out. It is just a matter of time until less rich places follow that model.
 
Fisher said:
Expect to see more places like Hilton Head where every community is gated, most with their own security, and some of them have their own fire departments just to keep people out. It is just a matter of time until less rich places follow that model.
Click to expand...

Lol city folk are funny. Those gated communities would be the first burnt to the ground if it did come to blows. They would be gone up in smoke.

 
The poll does not have the option Other. If we are going to have a Civil War it will be a COLD Civil War. Keep in mind a Civil War will involve the governments of States and possibly subsets of States. Basically what will happen is that some of the States will refuse to cooperate with the Federal Government for the execution of Federal Laws such as those that address medical marijuana, or those of light bulbs. Also programs which are unfunded mandates form the Federal Government will not followed by the States. Furthermore, if masses of people do not cooperate in providing information or following other types of requirements there is not much that the Federal Government can do outside of random prosecution of people.
 
repeter said:
You're saying that they aren't adhering to the Constitution. So, pick a law you think violates the Constitution, and start working up the legal ladder. If you disagree with their holding, well too bad. Their word is mostly final.
Click to expand...

That doesn't really work all that well when the problem is interpretation pf the constitution.

Unless you're saying you think the SCOTUS itself is violating the Constitution. If that's the case, well, it's still too damned bad for you. If they were going to agree with you, I'd imagine it would be now, when the court is conservative. If you still don't agree with them, I'd suggest re-evaluating your positions on issues.
Click to expand...

Well it's pretty clear they gave themselves power that they were never intended to have long ago. My positions are however fine and I have no reason to re-evaluate them at this time.

:doh
Click to expand...

You can always tell me one place I'm wrong.
 
BMCM said:
Your thought process, just like those of the other like minded people stop at the " I'm gonna take up arms" point. There's a lot more involved then just that. You have to have an organized Militia which you don't. You have to have a plan, which you don't, you have to have a planned out objective, which you don't. You have to know whom your targets are, which you don't. Are you ready to destroy your neighborhood or do you have a secret hiding place. The only thing people like you have is talk. You say yu will take on the Gov. if they step too far, where's your point of no return, when do you and your militia stand up. Look at all the rights we've lost over the last several decades. Think Homeland Security, TSA, where's the line for you? I'm really curious, Where's the line for you?
Click to expand...


Glad that you know me so well, that you know all my plans and intentions and capabilities. Now, could you kindly point to anything I said indicating that I was one of those who'd be doing the armed rebellion thing?



Who am I: I spent 25 years in the U.S.Navy EOD. I've crawled thru the mud,blood and tears. I've planned and executed missions into countries you've never even heard of. I do have a pretty good idea of what I speak. Whats your resume?
Click to expand...

Not gonna recite it for you; some of the folks who have been here a long while know some of it. I've had an interesting life and quite a bit of it involved professions where violence was likely.
 
Nope not going to happen...theres always an unhappy group that stamps their feet...
 
Henrin said:
That doesn't really work all that well when the problem is interpretation pf the constitution.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's why I said the second part. Too damned bad man :shrug:

Henrin said:
Well it's pretty clear they gave themselves power that they were never intended to have long ago. My positions are however fine and I have no reason to re-evaluate them at this time.
Click to expand...

Obviously the courts don't agree with you.

Henrin said:
You can always tell me one place I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

I could, but it wouldn't make any difference.
 
repeter said:
Yeah, that's why I said the second part. Too damned bad man :shrug:
Click to expand...

Too damn bad they ignored the law? Ok?

Obviously the courts don't agree with you.
Click to expand...

If they're at all knowledgeable about their job they would be forced to agree with me. Ruling in my favor however is another matter.

I could, but it wouldn't make any difference.
Click to expand...

The thing is you can't actually do it.
 
Henrin said:
Too damn bad they ignored the law? Ok?
Click to expand...

Too bad you think so.

Henrin said:
If they're at all knowledgeable about their job they would be forced to agree with me. Ruling in my favor however is another matter.
Click to expand...

I have a few responses to this. First, if you were even close to that knowledgeable, you would probably be doing something more worthwhile than whining about how you don't like the decisions on an internet forum. Second, from my own observations, you're clearly not that well-versed. Third, I can't take you the least bit seriously right now, because of the prior two points.

Henrin said:
The thing is you can't actually do it.
Click to expand...

Whatever you want buddy :lol:
 
BMCM said:
Who am I: I spent 25 years in the U.S.Navy EOD. I've crawled thru the mud,blood and tears. I've planned and executed missions into countries you've never even heard of. I do have a pretty good idea of what I speak.
Click to expand...

I was the bureau chief of the CIA station in Vladivostok towards the end of the Cold War. My codename was "Captain Counterinsurgency". I've garroted more people than you've had hot dinners.

Anyone can claim to be anything they want on the internet.
 
Whipsnade said:
1st Protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press, as well as the right to assemble and petition the government. Nope, that hasn't changed are is it on the horizon.
Click to expand...

Given the Free Zone bans on College campuses I would not say there has been no change. Furthermore, the establishment of "hate" crimes where people who were accused of a crime get extra penalties if it is believed were done by some sort of prejudice. And with respect to acting against bullying some suggest to limit the 1st Amendment basses of content of the speech and not over just harsh language (thoughts and beliefs that they disagree with).


2nd Protects an individual's right to bear arms.

Full auto? Thats been on the books for years. So called assault rifles,really Semi automatics.High Capacity ninety rounder mags?Who needs these for self-defense or hunting?
Click to expand...

Government mandated Segregation and other Jim Crow laws was on the books for decades and recognized by the Federal Government in the military for nearly as long. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to have the capability to overthrow a Tyrannical government and while full auto is generally not practical but is for the benefit for suppressive fire where needed. Semi auto is the principal fire arm of the US military and must be available to the general public for the same purpose.
I have NEVER heard any talk about repealing my,and your conceal carry rights; maybe I move in different circle than you do though.
Click to expand...

Lets be clear there are people in the House and Senate which do believe that American citizens should not be able to bear arms or even own them. They are in a minority now but hold positions of power in the Committees and with the present set up where bills are produced in the 11th hour and are not read by the members of the Legeslative Branch (since they are not able to) such blanket bans are possible after all did not the Obama Care bill became law since it would have to pass to read it?
Click to expand...
 
repeter said:
Too bad you think so.
Click to expand...

Tell me about the commerce clause again or how about that general welfare clause?

I have a few responses to this. First, if you were even close to that knowledgeable, you would probably be doing something more worthwhile than whining about how you don't like the decisions on an internet forum.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what there is to do about it. Have any ideas that don't involve going to the courts thinking they will care their own interests are the problem?

Second, from my own observations, you're clearly not that well-versed.
Click to expand...

I have never seen anything from you that I remember, so..
 
Henrin said:
Tell me about the commerce clause again or how about that general welfare clause?
Click to expand...

Again, too bad you think so.

Henrin said:
I'm not sure what there is to do about it. Have any ideas that don't involve going to the courts thinking they will care their own interests are the problem?
Click to expand...

Your job, not mine. I'm not the least bit interested in what you think is wrong with the court's interpretation of the Constitution.

Henrin said:
I have never seen anything from you that I remember, so..
Click to expand...

I'm not the one claiming to know more about the Constitution than the Supreme Court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom