Nevada Petition to Secede

Reason #2.

Read No Treason by Lysander Spooner. It is a long essay. It is available on the web. Written about 1870. In short, he points out that the constitution either gave us the government we have or was powerless to prevent it. The essay was written as a refutation of voices calling for the prosecution of certain confederate officials for their actions relative to the war. The bulk of the essay is a very eye opening examination of the constitution and government. You will find it hard to maintain intellectual honesty and keep your existing views of the constitution.

Read Hologram of Liberty by Boston T. Party pen name for Kenneth Royce. A hologram is a type of image, the implication here being that it is not the thing it looks like. Royce lays out some very compelling arguments that the constitution is actually arranged to facilitate the fedgov morphing into the monster it has become. He covers the shenanigans during, before, and after the constitutional convention. He covers the unfinished Article III (courts) and the Judiciary Act of (1789?) which some scholars have aptly observed was actually a constitutional amendment dressed as an act of the new congress. He covers a good bit more , too. He makes two overall points in addition to the one I first mentioned. First, that idolizing the constitution makes it difficult to see what is actually there. And, second, when you find yourself constantly losing the game, at some point you have to wonder if the rules themselves are rigged against you. The book shows you how the rules of the game--the constitution--are rigged against you.

Thus, I conclude that the constitution itself is defective. As Spooner pointed out, it either gave us the government we have or was powerless to prevent it. If the constitution itself is defective, restoring it won't work. And, that is assuming the power-mad would give up their machinations and twists and finding implied powers that aren't there or stop ignoring it.

John Pierce said:

The best way to fight to system is to BECOME the system.

Click to expand...

I find this disgusting.

I have twice been convicted of a crime for declining consent to a search and refusing to be a witness against myself. I have sat and listened as officers of the system told bald-faced lies, disproven by their own evidence, in order to convict me, in order to immunize them from lawsuit.

I want nothing to do with that system, except to watch it crumble under the weight of its corruption.

Like I said earlier in the thread, There's a reason to keep your name off of a list like this.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-supporters-call-for-secessionists-to-be-deported.html

A big +1 to what Ed and Citizen posted.

turborich said:

Like I said earlier in the thread, There's a reason to keep your name off of a list like this.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-supporters-call-for-secessionists-to-be-deported.html

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, we're all already on the lists, signed or not. Warrantless electronic surveillance is up 60% since 2009.

The only benefit to not signing these petitions is that it's one less charge they could potentially bring against you if they chose to go Brandon Raub style on you.

turborich said:

Like I said earlier in the thread, There's a reason to keep your name off of a list like this.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-supporters-call-for-secessionists-to-be-deported.html

Click to expand...

Alex Jones fills his niche nicely. I frequently disagree with his conclusions; and the steady diet of conspiracy can be a bit wearing, but I do usually find useful information. Even the video here has some interesting perspectives that helped sharpen my own.

I just wish he would ease up on the conspiracy angle. I once asked a fella who had a somewhat secretive career whether he ever came across any info to the effect that National Review and Bill Buckley were CIA fronts ie part of a CIA conspiracry to mold public opinion. The fella replied that it didn't matter--the effect was the same. Meaning, whether the conspiracy existed or not, the effect of Buckley and National Review got you to the same place. You didn't need a conspiracy angle to Buckley and National Review. They accomplished what they accomplished as far as public opinion goes.

Similar for Alex Jones and his bankster conspiracies. A conspiracy is not necessary to create the effects they do. You can achieve the same result with each bankster operating merely out of self-interest. And, by omitting a conspiracy angle, you alienate fewer listeners.

I'm not saying there are no bankster conspiracies. Given the direction they are headed, there almost has to be some sort of superficial overall agreement. But, people can figure that out for themselves once they have the information.

Be careful what you wish for, There's a reason we have no state income tax, and fairly low property taxes here and federal funding is part of those reasons. I will submit though, that should the feds decide to go Thelma and Louise this might not be a bad idea!

Im pretty sure what he was reffering to when he said "become the system" is to be active in your government. Much like what tim has done running for assembly. Attend forums and hearings, dont be complaicent and expect others to make the changes for you. BE the change you want to see. As for nevada receeding....i see it as a knee jerk reaction to the out come of the elections. I dont see how taking the steps towards civil war will help my country progress. Another constitutional convention wpuld be the best way to start IMHO.

28kfps said:

DVC Haven’t seen you post for a while. I guess this subject rattled your computer keyboard.

I believe the right to protest within legal boundaries is a very valuable right however, It would appear to me this is a knee jerk reaction due to the result of the election.
Just my own thought however I believe the initiators realize there is no or little chance of it being successful. I am all for trying to wake up Washington DC. Not sure a petition to Secede will have much of an influence. I am going to make a prediction and that is, it will never happen. To argue for or against the issue might make for some good conversation. However, I believe a mute point.

Click to expand...

I've been here now and then, but busy. On the 8th day I rest.

I don't agree with your assessment that this is "knee jerk." I see it more as the next step in the process of protesting the power-hungry elite in DC and other places.

However, if you study the American Revolution, you see that, at most, only about 1/3 of the people wanted "independency" -- another 1/3 were Loyalists and the remaining 1/3 were more or less neutral. We see similar numbers if we look at the election, with 1/3 for Romney, 1/3 for Idiot-Board Barack, and 1/3 who sat out the election. Many of those who sat it out are amenable to secession, but try to keep a low political profile. This does not bode well for DC, especially as more people read the Declaration of Independence (many for the first time).

It's not even a Republican-Democrat issue. Both of the two largest parties have gone power-mad, in different directions.

If push came to shove, AND if the "red" states joined together in a secession movement, they would be successful. The "blue" states have spent decades driving manufacturing, energy production, farming and the military into the "red" states. In addition, the primary economic engines on the two coasts would be cut off from each other, while the "red" states would enjoy strong and open internal lines of communication. It would only take moments to cut California off from their main energy sources (Hoover Dam, Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station and the natural gas pipelines across Arizona). What little energy production takes place on the West Coast isn't enough to serve 10% of their needs. They would fold, and rapidly. You might even see Southern California secede from both the Union and Sacramento.

About 35% of the current US Army roster comes from Texas, and over 75% from "red" states. The Air Force has similar numbers, the Navy not as strong but still has heavy "red" state background.

To bring it closer to home, just consider the difference between Nevada and California when it comes to gun culture. Our neighboring state has spent decades condemning gun owners, so how many of those do you think would answer a call by Jerry Brown or Obama to march against Nevadans? Many would come here, but it would be for refuge!

Yes, this is an issue which I have given considerable thought to, but for perhaps the strangest reason of anyone else here -- I've been writing a sequel to a book written by another writer a few years back. In his book, Texas seceded, was joined by a couple of other states, but won their goals and returned to the Union. My sequel carries the story 5 years further, looking at how American political leadership changes -- and how it doesn't, forcing the issue once again.

Nevada carrier said:

Be careful what you wish for, There's a reason we have no state income tax, and fairly low property taxes here and federal funding is part of those reasons.

Click to expand...

However, if Nevada were no longer under the thumb of the various alphabet agencies such as the EPA and BLM, the economic boom which resulted would more than replace the Federal funding.

And imagine the result if Nevada casinos could boast that the money won there would NOT be reported to the IRS! Or that it would be paid in Nevada gold and silver instead of paper!

If we go I want Utah to come with us, I love Utah!

How would the state get around this little gem that makes our State Constitution unique, Remember our State was formed during the Civil War.

ORDINANCE

Slavery prohibited; freedom of religious worship; disclaimer of public lands. [Effective until the date Congress consents to amendment or a legal determination is made that such consent is not necessary.]  In obedience to the requirements of an act of the Congress of the United States, approved March twenty-first, A.D. eighteen hundred and sixty-four, to enable the people of Nevada to form a constitution and state government, this convention, elected and convened in obedience to said enabling act, do ordain as follows, and this ordinance shall be irrevocable, without the consent of the United States and the people of the State of Nevada:

First. That there shall be in this state neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment for crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.

Second. That perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured, and no inhabitant of said state shall ever be molested, in person or property, on account of his or her mode of religious worship.

Third. That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States; and that lands belonging to citizens of the United States, residing without the said state, shall never be taxed higher than the land belonging to the residents thereof; and that no taxes shall be imposed by said state on lands or property therein belonging to, or which may hereafter be purchased by, the United States, unless otherwise provided by the congress of the United States.

[Amended in 1956. Proposed and passed by the 1953 legislature; agreed to and passed by the 1955 legislature; approved and ratified by the people at the 1956 general election. See: Statutes of Nevada 1953, p. 718; Statutes of Nevada 1955, p. 926.]

Nevada carrier said:

If we go I want Utah to come with us, I love Utah!

Click to expand...

The most likely scenario has all of the Western states other than WA, OR and CA seceding.

The group which has documented irregularities in the vote which made Hawaii a state thinks that the Islands would revert to independence.

When Congress wrote the Constitution, they just up and tossed out the existing articles of the confederation. If someone REALLY wants to get technical, even the US Constitution should not be the binding law of the land.

BUT, with each generation, we are de facto accepting it. It's the same with any technical legal "out" to the existing Union.

People are sheep. If the sheepdogs say the farm fence has always been where it currently is, they will accept it, even if they can still see the fresh post holes a half a field away, where it used to be. What few troublemakers still insist will either be placated with a seemingly logical reason for moving the fence (sheepdog safety or conservation of farm resources, etc) or will simply be the first ones randomly chosen for a sheering accident.

Oh sure, some of the older rams will tell some of the young ones about liberty, and what the leafage was like when there was no fence, just a caring shepherd who let them roam and only intervened in times of true trouble, but those stories will fade to legend, only to be circulated on the GGG (Great Global Grass) network, and constantly monitored by the WOLVES, of course. (World Organization of Liberal Values for an Enslaved State)

MAC702 said:

SNIP People are sheep...

Click to expand...

Nicely put.

DVC said:

The most likely scenario has all of the Western states other than WA, OR and CA seceding.

The group which has documented irregularities in the vote which made Hawaii a state thinks that the Islands would revert to independence.

Click to expand...

The western coastal states would be isolated and have to make their own or get their goods from Canada or Mexico, or deal with bordering seceded states, of course with an added tax. ;o)

Secession is a half step! "Secession to what?" is the question that begs answering.

DON`T TREAD ON ME said:

Secession is a half step! "Secession to what?" is the question that begs answering.

Click to expand...

Yep... from one government to another... the continuous revolving door.

I think the right is valid, but I'm not sure it's go time just yet.

I'd like to see something like this tried first:

- abolish the IRS
- repeal the 16th Amendment
- amend to allow fedgov to tax nothing on an individual level other than tariffs on imported goods
- amend to forbid fedgov ANY borrowing without 3/4 override of both houses + president + constitutional declaration of war
- amend to forbid Congress from delegating its duty & power to coin money (ie End the Fed)
- then, most importantly: amend to say fedgov gets 1/2 of all tax revenue raised by each individual state. This means that if you need $X to run your state, you better raise $2X in revenue. This also means that fedgov will have a budget equal to the combined budgets of all states. They should easily be able to fulfill their constitutional duties on such tax levels. How each state taxes is up to them - all sales & property like here in NV, or aggressive communist income taxes in addition like in Cali, or somewhere in between. There is no reason that the federal government should not be able to operate on the same amount of money that all states manage to operate with combined.

BTW - there is a Nevada Secession page on Facebook forming for those who are interested: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Nevada-Secession/100855236626503

metaforge said:

I think the right is valid, but I'm not sure it's go time just yet.

I'd like to see something like this tried first:

- abolish the IRS
- repeal the 16th Amendment
- amend to allow fedgov to tax nothing on an individual level other than tariffs on imported goods
- amend to forbid fedgov ANY borrowing without 3/4 override of both houses + president + constitutional declaration of war
- amend to forbid Congress from delegating its duty & power to coin money (ie End the Fed)
- then, most importantly: amend to say fedgov gets 1/2 of all tax revenue raised by each individual state. This means that if you need $X to run your state, you better raise $2X in revenue. This also means that fedgov will have a budget equal to the combined budgets of all states. They should easily be able to fulfill their constitutional duties on such tax levels. How each state taxes is up to them - all sales & property like here in NV, or aggressive communist income taxes in addition like in Cali, or somewhere in between. There is no reason that the federal government should not be able to operate on the same amount of money that all states manage to operate with combined.

BTW - there is a Nevada Secession page on Facebook forming for those who are interested: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Nevada-Secession/100855236626503

Click to expand...

I like it. All except that last one. I would just leave that out. Just give them no enforcement mechanism for apportioned taxes ala Articles of Confederation. Then the state legislatures will totally beholden to the taxpayers in their state. If the legislature raises taxes to pay excessive federal spending, the taxpayers in each state can pressure their state legislature.

Also, repeal the language authorizing the fedgov to put down rebellions, and put the Guard and Reserves under exclusive state control unless the governor and legislature assign them to federal duty. Leave it up to individual states to ask other states for assistance if needed. With all the fancy war toys held by Guard and Reserve units, an intra-state rebellion can be handled by the state. And, the fedgov can no longer go around claiming that a War of Involuntary Union is actually a rebellion.

Citizen said:

I like it. All except that last one. I would just leave that out. Just give them no enforcement mechanism for apportioned taxes ala Articles of Confederation. Then the state legislatures will totally beholden to the taxpayers in their state. If the legislature raises taxes to pay excessive federal spending, the taxpayers in each state can pressure their state legislature.

Click to expand...

I understand, but if you leave it open ended, who knows what they will try. This is the "carrot" to offer to liberals, because if you did my plan today, the feds would get about the same tax 'revenue' (god I hate that word used for taxes - revenue should mean providing a product/service mutually agreed upon by a free market buyer & seller at a mutually agreed upon price - not coerced vigs taken at the point of a gun... sigh) as they have today, but the key difference being where it comes from is up to the states. As you say the legislature is still under pressure because if they raise taxes too high on federal pressure, people will balk. They'll be pressured by both sides, and guess which side gets to vote to keep them in power? That's right - the people. Helluva tiebreaker, eh?

Also, repeal the language authorizing the fedgov to put down rebellions, and put the Guard and Reserves under exclusive state control unless the governor and legislature assign them to federal duty. Leave it up to individual states to ask other states for assistance if needed. With all the fancy war toys held by Guard and Reserve units, an intra-state rebellion can be handled by the state. And, the fedgov can no longer go around claiming that a War of Involuntary Union is actually a rebellion.

Click to expand...

Yes, agree with this completely.