Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
While finding exactly what you are looking for can be suspect and the name of the org. is a bit far out (and does raise some red flags), we can't discount this out-of-hand. A good bit of info pointed to this area and have been presented (and confirmed, somewhat) before.Promising, yes; waiting to see.
Took me a bit to find the ref.; in his intro to Liberty and Freedom, Fischer gives us the following: “… liberty comes from the Latin libertas and its adjective form liber, which meant unbounded, unrestricted, and released from restraint.” He goes on to add that this was “… similar to the Greek eleutheria and eleutheros…” which they used to mean a condition of independence, or being separate and / or distinct. Both (Greeks and Romans) implied here, according to him, a degree of separation and independence.So too, Fischer outlines the sources of the word freedom; coming from various northern European languages with a common root. "... from the Indo-European priya or friya or riya, which meant dear or beloved. ... freedom and free have the same root word as friend, as do their German cousins frei and Freund. Free meant someone who was joined to a tribe of free people by ties of kinship and rights of belonging."He goes on to say that the original meanings of the two (liberty and freedom) were not just different but opposed... liberty meant separation (autonomy) and freedom implied connection (inclusion within a group) that carried the rights and responsibilities of the group as a condition of inclusion.Most people have a tough time understanding that liberty and freedom are different, but Fischer makes a good case, readily understood. Liberty is our unrestricted autonomy and freedom is the sum total of our rights within the structure our society has agreed upon... the fact that our founders recognized a difference and tried to maximize our liberty with in the structures of our freedom shows how far-thinking they were. Withour becoming political I'd say our current leaders could learn a great deal if the studied the Founders a bit more....Sadly, even if they did have it, most folks would have a hard time with true liberty; we've lived too long assuming we aren't in control and that the freedom we have is given to us by the gov't., rather than being the product of our connection to our society.
....Another question; what is the difference between Liberty and Freedom? The way a person answers this goes a long way towards explaining their views on the 2nd Amendment.
And much else....
Okay I guess I will formerly jump in here (though I tried not to). ;D.... Take it for what it's worth.
Works for me; fits in with the info I've read (and quoted) nicely.
Your hint was too "hinty" LOL.
:-[When I used this with the 10th graders I think I used something like: "On this date in 1937, the first air raid on a civilian target happening in this war..."; they all guessed WWI and WWII (oh no... a couple said Viet Nam... a stock answer for many kids as it is ancient history to them :o)I'll try to do better in the future. 😉
.... I merely suggested that the Sec. of State's remarks may have emboldened the North Koreanforces to move south more rapidly than planned and do so with the belief that America was not committedto the arrangement made at the end of WWII. ....
In his book, This Kind of War, T. R. Fehrenbach gives us this."On 12 January 1950 Secretary of state Acheson spoke to the National Press Club in Washington. During the speech it came to public light that neither Korea nor Taiwan were within the United States' security cordon in the Far East. This was nothing new. The Korean decision had been made prior to 17 September 1947, when the United States had informed Russia of its intention to place the Korean problem before the United Nations. And the United States was still cautiously waiting for the 'dust to settle' on the Chinese question." pg. 32.IMHO the main miscalculation was ours but had more to do with the type of war we expected; we were contemplating a global war for which we held most all the cards (bombs), not the type of war Korea became (hence the title of the book). We never have thought of war as a political tool while most of the rest of the world accepts this as a given and in Fehrenbach's words on our position at the time, "... it [the US] had a look history of looking the other way if not immediately threatened." Was this what you were looking for?I recommend the book quoted, highly.
So do you think our foreign policy/military doctrine (or in this case a lack of or ambiguity) provoked the Korean War? Or did the North Korean army pouring into South Korea have anything to do with it? I vote the latter.
So would the troops led by Brad Smith.
It does look like some of Richmond also but wrong continent as well as war.Hint is: "lunes gerniqu?s, golperik ez". This translates roughly as "not a stroke of work gets done on Mondays".
Not necessarily. True, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. This fact sheet from the National Lawyers Guild outlines a host of rights afforded to immigrants and citizens alike. (There are a few rights reserved for citizens. Among them are the right to vote, the right to hold most federal jobs, and the right to run for political office.)
What about 2nd amendment--I do not think citizenship is a requirement here in NY State
In CA one must be a citizen or have authorization to purchase if a foreign national. If you are not a citizen, some visas may allow you to purchase firearms, but normally you are not able to... the person in question would need to submit a Personal Firearms Eligibility Check (PFEC) to the Ca Dept of Justice, along with a copy of your California Driver?s License or Identification Card, and fees in the amount of $20. The application must be signed and notarized, and include an impression of your right thumbprint. If you are a non-U.S. citizen, you must also submit a copy of your Alien Registration or I-94 Card and a check for $20.00... results are sent via U.S. Mail. The Department of Justice makes every effort to process requests for PFECs within 30 days of receipt. However, due to budget constraints, please allow 90 - 120 days for the results. Attached is a list of reasons a person would be turned down. For more info on CA go here.Note: I have taken the liberty of setting your rejoinder apart from the body of the other quotes (easier to read) and underlined and embolding the most important points.
I think you are reading it incorrectly. I grew up in upstate New York in a blue collar neighborhood where almost all the Dads hunted and had guns in the house. They also voted for Democrats as they were usually the sons or grandsons of immigrants and saw that party (read FDR) as being theirs circa 1955. The guns were never a problem except for pistols which New York had pretty much locked down carry permits at thattime. In all the time I sat with these fathers or cleaned guns or tossed dogs into cars, I never rememberany conversation wherein guns were discussed as anything else than tools to kill animals and run off peoplewho ought not to have been in the neighborhood, These guys did not screech about government as manyhad spent several years defending it. There was never any discussion of the 2nd amendment! Perhaps thesesteel workers, chemical mixers and factory hands did not even know it existed. I do sincerely believe thatthey thought owning a gun was normal, reasonable and a right. I was upset because my Dad had not foughtin the war, did not hunt and did not own nor want to own a gun; he saw no need.
I would tend to agree that it wasn't intended as a duty but certainly a reminder to both the people and the government it was one of those natural rights. The point that the folks in upstae NY didn't discuss the 2nd Amendment is telling (while divergent) because it wasn't discussed much anywhere until the concept was called to question after JFK was killed; the relative ease and low cost to purchase the murder weapon shocked many people. The knee-jerk reaction was the Gun Control Act of 1968 and other similar later day regs.Willy, I've always slipped that thing about well regulated in since reading somewhere that the term was used (some) in that manner in those times... can't cite source so discount it if you will. I do usually include that it is iffy too ;).
You're more than likely correct (though I think the usage I mention is possible) what was meant by the Framers but to make the point more clear here is Hamilton on the matter:The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss. --- The Federalist Papers, No. 29.
