Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 60

Thread: Secession from the union

  1. #1
    Regular Member KYKevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Owensboro, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    328

    Secession from the union

    20 States file to secede from the union

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...190210006.html

    Wonder how this will go?
    Kentucky Open Carry Group
    http://opencarry.niceboards.org/

    We all speak of liberty and freedom like we are the only ones that know the truth and the right path. But if we expect everyone to accept and follow our path and to accept our truth and want to force it upon them then that is no longer liberty or freedom. It is slavery. I believe in liberty for all. Regardless of their political views, religion, race, sex, etc.

  2. #2
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    Quote Originally Posted by KYKevin View Post
    20 States file to secede from the union

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...190210006.html

    Wonder how this will go?
    That list cannot be right, NC's constitution forbids seceding from the union. The NC constitution would have to be changed, before it could.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  3. #3
    Regular Member KYKevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Owensboro, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    328
    Kentucky Open Carry Group
    http://opencarry.niceboards.org/

    We all speak of liberty and freedom like we are the only ones that know the truth and the right path. But if we expect everyone to accept and follow our path and to accept our truth and want to force it upon them then that is no longer liberty or freedom. It is slavery. I believe in liberty for all. Regardless of their political views, religion, race, sex, etc.

  4. #4
    Regular Member KYKevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Owensboro, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    That list cannot be right, NC's constitution forbids seceding from the union. The NC constitution would have to be changed, before it could.
    I am not sure if there is anything in the Kentucky State Constitution or not. Will be interesting to see how this all turns out. I imagine it is just posturing.
    Kentucky Open Carry Group
    http://opencarry.niceboards.org/

    We all speak of liberty and freedom like we are the only ones that know the truth and the right path. But if we expect everyone to accept and follow our path and to accept our truth and want to force it upon them then that is no longer liberty or freedom. It is slavery. I believe in liberty for all. Regardless of their political views, religion, race, sex, etc.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    The odds of the American government granting any state permission to go its own way are on par with winning the lottery while getting hit by a meteor while seeing Bigfoot while finding gluten-free pizza that tastes like the real thing.
    Sadly, this is spot on. The Federal Government is not going to set its cash cows free, and it certainly is not going to want competition in its own borders. (In the words of Highlander, "There can be only one!")

    Does it concern anyone else that these petitions were started, not by the states, but by individuals, and in order to sign them you have to log your information with the White House? Also, the idea of so meekly asking permission to withdraw seems so...whipped.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by KYKevin View Post
    I am not sure if there is anything in the Kentucky State Constitution or not. Will be interesting to see how this all turns out. I imagine it is just posturing.
    When they start forming alliances with other like-minded states is the time to start stockpiling and reloading.
    Last edited by Citizen; 11-12-2012 at 06:03 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  7. #7
    Regular Member KYKevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Owensboro, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    Sadly, this is spot on. The Federal Government is not going to set its cash cows free, and it certainly is not going to want competition in its own borders. (In the words of Highlander, "There can be only one!")

    Does it concern anyone else that these petitions were started, not by the states, but by individuals, and in order to sign them you have to log your information with the White House? Also, the idea of so meekly asking permission to withdraw seems so...whipped.
    That is nothing. The CSA of Kentucky says I can become a member of the CSA here. And although I was born and raised here. I still need to give them $50 to register as a citizen. Do I have to move if I don't pay the $50? Someone is already trying to make money off this.

    http://www.kentuckycsa.org/

    I did get a kick out of the asking bit. I mean if they were serious they would just declare it and be done. I know they want you too. But is it like you really care about their rules if you don't want to be a part of them any more?

    You can sign it at other sites I thing like Ipetitions.com How real these are I don't know.
    Kentucky Open Carry Group
    http://opencarry.niceboards.org/

    We all speak of liberty and freedom like we are the only ones that know the truth and the right path. But if we expect everyone to accept and follow our path and to accept our truth and want to force it upon them then that is no longer liberty or freedom. It is slavery. I believe in liberty for all. Regardless of their political views, religion, race, sex, etc.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Griz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    When they start forming alliances with other like-minded states is the time to stockpiling and reloading.
    Interesting. A simple, noteworthy statement that both excites and scares the hell out of me.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by KYKevin View Post
    That is nothing. The CSA of Kentucky says I can become a member of the CSA here. And although I was born and raised here. I still need to give them $50 to register as a citizen. Do I have to move if I don't pay the $50? Someone is already trying to make money off this.

    http://www.kentuckycsa.org/

    I did get a kick out of the asking bit. I mean if they were serious they would just declare it and be done. I know they want you too. But is it like you really care about their rules if you don't want to be a part of them any more?

    You can sign it at other sites I thing like Ipetitions.com How real these are I don't know.
    Oh, I would be very, very careful of something like that. They could be very real--a real attempt by the fedgov or a fusion center to register traitors.

    And, I do mean traitors. Setting up another government or entity within the territory of an existing government without that government's approval is treason. Just have a look and see your state law has its own treason statutes defining treason against your state government (which by the way is more proof that once upon a time the states were a lot more powerful than today).

    "A second branch of high treason against the state, consists in erecting or establishing or causing or procuring to be erected or established, any government separate from, or independent of the government of Virginia, within the limits thereof, unless by act of the legislature of this commonwealth..." St. George Tucker. I am sure it is just a coincidence, but legislative permission was requested for something similar when Kentucky was still part of Virginia. http://www.virginia1774.org/TransylvaniaTreasure.html

    Note also that, although the federal constitution defines treason differenty, something in the constitution speaks towards the matter. The quote below is talking about admitting new states, which is another way of saying whether they will be recognized, so its not directly on point. But, clearly, forming your own state government within another won't be recognized unless it is with the permission of the existing state's legislature. This is more for perspective than proof.

    Article IV, Section III: New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress...

    The important thing to realize is that this is a very sensitive subject.
    Last edited by Citizen; 11-12-2012 at 06:10 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  10. #10
    Regular Member conandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    248
    I don't see any way a state or group of states could do this. The government holds to much power and influence. I think the best way for the states handle it would be. ( if I remember this form my school days correctly) if 32 states I think it is can come together and call for a constitutional convention. That's where I think they could get some results. If I'm wrong I know someone will correct me, but that is how I remember it

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by conandan View Post
    I don't see any way a state or group of states could do this. The government holds to much power and influence. I think the best way for the states handle it would be. ( if I remember this form my school days correctly) if 32 states I think it is can come together and call for a constitutional convention. That's where I think they could get some results. If I'm wrong I know someone will correct me, but that is how I remember it
    Dangerous idea, my friend.

    The original con-con jumped completely out of its boundaries. It was formed to tune up the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union.* It went completely off the rails, usurped authority it did not have, and wrote the constitution we have today, minus the first ten amendments. There is a letter from Alexander Hamilton to George Washington a few months before the convention hinting that the convention would shift gears after convening--meaning, it was intentional and planned. But! Not by all the delegates, because some delegates walked out early in protest saying their legislatures did not give them the authority to write a new scheme of government. So, there was sneaky dealing going on. And, the convention omitted a bill of rights on the specious theory that the new fedgov would only have the powers stated. And, we all know how that promise worked out, even with the bill of rights we did get two years later.

    And, make no mistake, were it not for the herculean efforts of men like Patrick Henry and George Mason strenuously opposing the constitution, we wouldn't have gotten the bill of rights. The Federalists--supporters of the constitution--actively opposed a bill of rights. Henry and others feared the proposed little low-power fedgov would morph into a monster that overshadowed the states and afflicted the people. The only reason we got a bill of rights was because the Federalists realized Henry and other anti-constitutionalists could derail ratification. Today, we know the anti-federalists, the anti-constitutionalists called it right about the constitution and what the fedgov would become.

    There is no way to control a con-con. It can do pretty much whatever it wants, no matter how much one tries to limit it. If self-interested, power-hungry men can get themselves assigned as delegates, or the delegates can be corrupted in other ways, we may end up with something even worse than we have now. All sold to us as "for the good of the nation". Sold to a pliable populace worried about unemployment, their free health care, the economy, and most of who haven't the faintest clue about about monetary policy or what a power-center is.

    Chief Justice Warren Burger had this to say almost 30 years ago:

    I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the convention would obey. After a convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don't like its agenda. The meeting in 1787 ignored the limit placed by the confederation Congress "for the sole and express purpose."

    http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/concon/burger.htm



    *Neat little trick there. The constitutional convention and ratification abolished a contractually perpetual union. But, when Lincoln came along, it was war to prevent southern states from leaving a union the contract for which nowhere mentions perpetual. That's how much you can trust government to play by the rules.
    Last edited by Citizen; 11-12-2012 at 10:30 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by conandan View Post
    I don't see any way a state or group of states could do this. The government holds to much power and influence. I think the best way for the states handle it would be. ( if I remember this form my school days correctly) if 32 states I think it is can come together and call for a constitutional convention. That's where I think they could get some results. If I'm wrong I know someone will correct me, but that is how I remember it
    The states could originate an amendment. Article V directs that congress shall call a con-con whenever 2/3 of states request, but that doesn't mean the states can't do it another way. And, even if it did mean the states can't do it another way (which you can be sure will be the federal court's interpretation), the fedgov really isn't going to be in a position to argue with 3/4 of the states if they ratify an amendment proposed that way.

    I think the real problem is that too many state governors and legislators have their eye on federal office, their snout in the federal trough, or supporters receiving rent* from the fedgov. All held together by the two-party system.


    * a reference to rent-seeker. A rent-seeker is someone who seeks an advantage from government, for example the corn farmers who obtained ethanol subsidies.
    Last edited by Citizen; 11-12-2012 at 10:43 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  13. #13
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    It is a dangerous idea, absolutely no doubt. But one we may eventually not be able to avoid.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  14. #14
    Regular Member conandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    248
    I see your point that with corrupt and power hungry people it could go really bad. But something has to be done about politicians and judges stripping away our constitutional rights. The federal government has gone way over the authority granted to them in our constitution. The only way I can see it being fixed is if enough states stand up and demand action.

    I don't want to see this country fall. But something needs to happen fast or it will be to late, if it isn't already.

  15. #15
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    Quote Originally Posted by conandan View Post
    I see your point that with corrupt and power hungry people it could go really bad. But something has to be done about politicians and judges stripping away our constitutional rights. The federal government has gone way over the authority granted to them in our constitution. The only way I can see it being fixed is if enough states stand up and demand action.

    I don't want to see this country fall. But something needs to happen fast or it will be to late, if it isn't already.
    And we have to remember most states are inline with our thinking and already have state constitutions that support the people. What the states will be looking for, IMO, is restoration of states rights. The course of the states should be decided by the states.

    It still could backfire though.
    Last edited by WalkingWolf; 11-13-2012 at 01:08 AM.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by conandan View Post
    I see your point that with corrupt and power hungry people it could go really bad. But something has to be done about politicians and judges stripping away our constitutional rights. The federal government has gone way over the authority granted to them in our constitution. The only way I can see it being fixed is if enough states stand up and demand action.

    I don't want to see this country fall. But something needs to happen fast or it will be to late, if it isn't already.
    Agreed.

    I sorta suspect it might not be solveable. You'd have to convince a whole lot of people to knock off seeking something from the fedgov, like social security and medicare. Even the so-called conservatives are big law-and-order guys who believe in being tough on crime and can't see the damage of the war on drugs. Ditto for a strong military and the war on terror. As Ron Paul mentioned in the debates, it comes down to a fundamental question regarding the role of government. We have to get lots and lots of people to recognize that the problems we have with government have a lot to do with our concept of the proper role of government.

    Ron Paul's campaigns took off on college campuses, so there's a start. Hopefully we can get enough people persuaded before things totally collapse. I sorta think not; but I'm not giving up on a question that important.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    It is a dangerous idea, absolutely no doubt. But one we may eventually not be able to avoid.
    True. Its probably safest to assume that any opinion leader who calls for a con-con is suspect until he proves otherwise.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  18. #18
    Regular Member KYKevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Owensboro, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    328
    You all ever heard of the old saying. Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.
    Kentucky Open Carry Group
    http://opencarry.niceboards.org/

    We all speak of liberty and freedom like we are the only ones that know the truth and the right path. But if we expect everyone to accept and follow our path and to accept our truth and want to force it upon them then that is no longer liberty or freedom. It is slavery. I believe in liberty for all. Regardless of their political views, religion, race, sex, etc.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Our Constitution is gone. With the 47% firmly ensconced and growing in size, and with no longer being a nation of laws, not of men, the use of the ballot box to strip us of our rights and rob us of our money is permanent.

    Yes, a convention could give us a far worse document than the one we are not following now, but not having a convention will allow the descent into tyranny to worsen. As of a week ago, I would have been dead-set against a convention. Now I see one as one last peaceful chance to restore the Republic. Not much of a chance, but the only peaceful one. God help us if we don't take a peaceful chance to fix things.

  20. #20
    Regular Member carolina guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Concord, NC
    Posts
    1,790
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    That list cannot be right, NC's constitution forbids seceding from the union. The NC constitution would have to be changed, before it could.
    It has been changed numerous times..why not again, and remove that Reconstruction Era bit of foolishness. It could be argued that the NC Constitution written after the Civil War was unconscionable and not actually enforceable except by further threats of death and destruction...almost like a mafia-type agreement.
    If something is wrong for ONE person to do to another, it is still wrong if a BILLION people do it.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Tucker6900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Iowa, USA
    Posts
    1,249

    The bigger question is...

    What happens to our Constitutional rights if/when the state has seceeded? I assume we would lose the protection of the US Constitution, right? I understand the states have Constitutions as well, but this seems to be dangerous ground.
    The only terrorists I see nowadays are at the Capital.


    The statements made in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of OCDO or its members.

  22. #22
    Regular Member KYKevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Owensboro, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    328
    I find it odd that I have been watching fox, cnn and several local channels on tv and I have yet to see that first news story on this. Just on the internet. Apparently they don't even find it news worthy. The cia sex scandal is bigger and taking over the air.
    Kentucky Open Carry Group
    http://opencarry.niceboards.org/

    We all speak of liberty and freedom like we are the only ones that know the truth and the right path. But if we expect everyone to accept and follow our path and to accept our truth and want to force it upon them then that is no longer liberty or freedom. It is slavery. I believe in liberty for all. Regardless of their political views, religion, race, sex, etc.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Tucker6900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Iowa, USA
    Posts
    1,249
    Quote Originally Posted by KYKevin View Post
    I find it odd that I have been watching fox, cnn and several local channels on tv and I have yet to see that first news story on this. Just on the internet. Apparently they don't even find it news worthy. The cia sex scandal is bigger and taking over the air.
    Thats the best we get from .gov run media sites. They want to keep it as under the radar as possible.
    The only terrorists I see nowadays are at the Capital.


    The statements made in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of OCDO or its members.

  24. #24
    Regular Member KYKevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Owensboro, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker6900 View Post
    Thats the best we get from .gov run media sites. They want to keep it as under the radar as possible.
    Well if that is the case then it is both republicans and democrats.

    What I find even more odd is that state governors are not speaking out nor are any of our state representatives in Washington D.C.

    They don't want things to change. The real truth is all states have become welfare or nanny states of the Feds. I guess when it comes to welfare among the states it is the 100% feeding off the Feds.

    States don't want to say no the the free money the Feds give out every year.

    The people who work for our states in D.C. don't want to lose their D.C. jobs and the ones in the states want to get to D.C. later don't want to lose out on that chance.

    Since our state leaders have not spoken up It is probably safe to say that even if secession did happen. We would still be faced with the same problems within the states.
    Kentucky Open Carry Group
    http://opencarry.niceboards.org/

    We all speak of liberty and freedom like we are the only ones that know the truth and the right path. But if we expect everyone to accept and follow our path and to accept our truth and want to force it upon them then that is no longer liberty or freedom. It is slavery. I believe in liberty for all. Regardless of their political views, religion, race, sex, etc.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Why is everyone attributing these petitions to the states rather than to the individuals(some not even living in the states they petitioned for!) that launched the petitions?

    This is not a state initiative. It's an initiative launched by a few people in various states. They're doing it all wrong, even if the fedgov were to listen to them, they would still have to convince their state legislatures and probably most of the people in their state first. There is nothing that suggests any of these states would even consider secession.

    These petitions are like chain letters, but worse because the people reading them are attributing the 'letters' to someone the letters don't even try to attribute themselves to.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •