Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 34

Thread: A Constitution of no constitution, or Constitution Part Deux

  1. #1

    A Constitution of no constitution, or Constitution Part Deux

    The Constitution of the United States of America is a weak document. In some ways it is actually horrid. Don't misunderstand, the spirit of the document is in many ways laudable. I will add that for a first attempt at building a nation-state upon the notion of individual rights and freedom, it was not bad, especially given that it was done during a time and in a culture wholly marinated in Empire and a broader historical context of several thousands of years of ever expanding tyranny. Just think about what it must have meant to undertake that endeavor. The basic notions of equality and rights were largely unheard of, the Magna Carta notwithstanding, and even the mental gymnastics required to dope this whole thing out may have been well beyond the ken of many people in that day.

    Therefore, given that the Framers had no prior experience in terms of putting such concepts to practical work, I'd say they did an admirable job.

    We, however, are smarter than they were. Not more intelligent - but smarter because we have the benefit of an additional 225 years of history upon which to draw. We have seen depravity that the Framers perhaps knew was possible, but for whom the notion was just that - a concept. I personally doubt they could have readily accepted as anything more than a horribly depraved speculation, the idea of tyrants such as Stalin and Mao butchering people in the ways we know and take for granted as mere historical facts.

    They were not stupid men, nor naive, but they grew up during a very unique era in human history: the Enlightenment. What did they see? Yes, there was still plenty of war and stupid politics, which of course drove much of their cogitation in the design of their Republic. But all that still occurred within a moral framework that limited the actions of all but perhaps the three or four most horrifically demented lunatics in the western world... the Vladimir Tepeses of European culture. Warfare was conducted with a sense of honor where brave (if otherwise misguided, by today's standards) men stood in opposing ranks, exchanging gunfire.

    The superior men of this enlightened age had dispensed with the stupidities and corruption of the Roman Church, which had wreaked endless havoc upon the world for eleven centuries. In their eyes, and for better or worse, the world was evolving away from superstition and toward science. I can readily imagine that in their minds there was every good reason for cautious optimism; to believe there was a chance for the race of men to come to new understandings of their places in the world and to amends between one-time foes. Is this not a delightful thought; the end of rampaging political stupidity, endless hatred, and the horrific destruction and waste that come with men venting their anger upon each other?

    Whether realistic, I can see a strong motivation for such men to want to believe that the world was becoming a better place in slow but definite fashion. It had been the trend and, so far as I can see, there was no particular reason for them to suspect that it would all go wrong, especially to the degree to which the race of men must now endure. Their writings clearly indicate their awareness of the hazards in all of this, but that does not mean they did not possess the basic optimism to which I refer. I do not believe they imagined it possible for a single man and his regime to murder people tens of millions at a clip. Do you for a moment believe that they would have considered it likely that men would devise methods of mechanized mass slaughter and would then set them loose on each other? I am not even sure they had the mental capacity to go there hypothetically because they had no experience with such things. The Industrial Revolution was yet to manifest. Just look at how silly science fiction movies from the 50s, 60s, and even 70s and 80s look to us. The original Start Trek series where computers still used tapes as storage media, now makes us chuckle in these respects. It was difficult, if not impossible, to get away from the limitations of that vision because imagination can stretch only so far and retain its appeal.

    And so I believe it may have been this way for the Framers. They contrived their Constitution based on their best understandings of how the world of men operated. They would not have had the level of distrust that we do because as bad as their tyrants were, they could not compare with those of today, if for no other reason than those of past eras did not have at their disposal the technologies of today. But we possess the benefit of being the survivors of Stalin and Mao and all the others. We know about mechanized warfare, and nuclear bombs, and chemical weapons, weaponized disease agents, the power of media to mold thought and perception into forms that must have the likes of Jefferson and Patrick Henry spinning like gyros in their graves.

    We know what they could not have known. We see the mind bending depravity to which men will now plunge, not as matters of survival, but because they have been taught to crave it, seek it out, and practice it at every opportunity. Our Founders would not believe what they saw, were some of us to go back in time with video equipment and show them reels of 20th century history. I believe it would be so incomprehensibly shocking to them that they would be unable to accept much of it. It certainly would have broken their hearts, I suspect.

    Because of that, I see very little possibility that they could have designed a better architecture than that which they gave us. Their base assumptions about the world and men were based on what had come previously, and to that degree it was sound. It would not be reasonable to have expected more than this of them. Therefore, we owe them a debt of gratitude. Likewise, we owe it to ourselves, THEIR posterity, to correct the errors of the past based on what we have learned in the intervening time. To my way of thinking, that means a new foundation upon which the land in which we live rests. Their Constitution was, at best, an instrument meant for a nation of men who ready and willing to make good use of their fundamental intelligence and learning in pursuit of the maintenance of all that makes men worthy of their places in the Book of Life. It was meant for men of fundamentally sound moral character. It was meant for a population with characteristics that no longer exist in sufficient statistical predominance to have the necessary effect on the whole. All of the personal requirements tacitly specified by the Constitution are now largely extinct from the people of America, and that is a very real, very immediate problem of enormous significance and import. The ever diminishing presence of these qualities rings the death-knell not only for human freedom in America, but as a result of that death, the extinction of hope for the race of men globally for what could be endless generations to come. We are, each of us, witnessing as participants what may well prove to be the single greatest tragedy of all recorded human history. When America goes to Davey Jones, that will likely be it for the world for a very, very long time.

    Finally to my real point in posting here: I do believe not only that the Constitution can be improved, but that it behooves us to design and contrive its successor. But where the constitution speaking primarily in terms of institutions and their powers, we now need to speak in the superior voice of fundamental principles.

    I started that very project about 25 years ago when I decided to write for myself a constitution that would represent a quantum improvement over the current fare. I learned a lot for the exercise. The experience revealed to me that one cannot contrive a document that is perfect and self-preserving. It demonstrated that people are the key element because without them, there is no Constitution in the first place. There are no politics, morality, and so forth. The key location where all of this exists and pursuant to which the reality changes is between the ears of men. This knowledge is extremely important, if one wishes to hold a broader and former understanding of the way things work in truth and reality. The world is effected by us from the inside out and not so much otherwise. Our thoughts form our realities and the power in that truth is immense beyond containment. If we really want the things we say we want, then onus rests with us to alter mind first and foremost, because wherever mind goes, Brother Ass follows.

    My initial personal project was to write a constitution for a nation-state to replace the current fare with one of greatly improved design. During the last few years, however, I have come to view things a bit differently. I am no longer concerned with nation-states as they commonly exist and operate, nor with anarchies. I have realized that the labels one affixes to these sorts of social arrangements matter not as much as other considerations. Among those is the fact that if "law" as currently commonplace is replaced with correct and complete principle, the potential to see the resurrection of freedom becomes very real and looms very large in one's eyes. It is principle that holds primacy in terms of supplying abidingly correct values for men because those are not subject to the arbitrary whim and caprice of those people who find themselves in positions of "leadership" and for whom the temptations of power lead them to all manner of atrocious behaviors, destructive of their fellows.

    A document whose very structure focuses on the functional role of governance, as set into a rationally justifiable perspective by wrapping it in the context of the fundamental nature of human rights is what is needed. What we now have, rather, is one that emphasizes the elements, features, and characteristics of government, which almost of necessity shifts the mental focus away from the human rights it purports to defend in large part due to the set of tacit assumptions upon which that approach is based. It speaks of institutions at least as much as the rights of men and those brands of mental construct have a very long history in human affairs of taking on lives of their own, growing invariably into monsters that turn on their creators and consuming them in the end. That is because governments can be nothing other than monsters, and monsters can never be mastered for very long, the choice there invariably being kill or be killed.

    Therefore, the architecture I sought avoids government to a degree surpassed only by pure anarchism. We live in Empire as have our forebears for thousands of years. Removing it in its entirety, even if possible, cannot be done except in slow measure. Therefore, at least for the time being we are constrained to remold Empire into the form least offensive to proper human freedom and relations. I do believe this is eminently achievable in terms of the human ability to contrive the right environmental foundations. The only question that remains outstanding is whether sufficient humanity craves freedom and prosperity to actually screw up the nerve and the will to take that first and most difficult step, which is to alter mind. That has been at least the partial goal of my project. To alter perspective - perception itself - by specifying a body of principles in a way that I hope would appeal to more people than it would repel. I have no idea whether I am on the right track, but my approach seems reasonable to me. Perhaps the absence of tits and beer will doom it to failure - I cannot say, and so that is why I here post what I have thus far. In my document I speak not of institutions, but of roles. This is, I believe, a fundamental departure from any constitution on the planet that is in current effect, though I may be wrong given I've not read so many of them. But I do know the most common patterns of thought and perception in such matters and I feel fairly confident that nobody has beat me to the punch in terms of not only the basic mental approach, but document structure as well.

    I specify not governmental entities and structures, but rather functions of governance, rights of men, and how the two relate to each other not only philosophically, but in terms of actual practice.

    Therefore, let us now take a look at what I have wrought. It is by no means complete, nor is it perfect. But I do believe it is a reasonable beginning and would like to gage interest anyone might have in helping to perfect the concepts set forth herein. I hold no naive illusions of this ever being realized, but I do firmly believe that the exercise and the resulting work, if sufficiently perfected, may serve at the very least as an initial enticement and a guide to others to view the matters therein addressed in a different way from that which now commonly infests the minds of otherwise intelligent, well meaning, and good people. It is my hope with this, above all else, to provide a basis for perceptual metamorphosis, that people may come to see themselves and their fellows in terms of their interrelations in ways they had never before considered.

    Once again, where mind goes...




    Last edited by osan; 12-25-2014 at 09:55 AM. Reason: typos galore...
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    The
    Principles
    And
    Derived Law
    - Of -
    Proper Human Relations
    For The
    Self Governance
    Of
    Free People



    Nucleus


    Preamble

    Herein are presented the First Principles, Secondary Principles, and the Body of Law that thence derives directly, axiomatically, and apodictically by which Free Men may comport themselves with proper self-governance.


    The provisions and specifications of this Embodiment shall be set forth in two separate Sections that are to be called the Nucleus, of which this Preamble is a part, and the Orbit. [SUBORBIT???]


    The Nucleus addresses questions and issues that are of a fundamental and inherently immutable nature, the specifications and requirements of which no man or group thereof, however constituted and regardless of claims, assertions, or boasts to the contrary, may claim authority to violate in any measure, at any time, or for any reason.


    Included herein are the Apodictic Principles that arise naturally and axiomatically as the result of the fundamental and self-evident nature of our existences as living beings. These Principles are set forth and enshrined within the Canon Of Inherence.


    This Nucleus further derives and formalizes the Secondary Axioms that follow in direct and obvious fashion from the apodictic First Principles. These Axioms constitute the Canon Of Proper Human Relations, setting forth the basis of principled self-governance for Free Men.


    From the specifications of these Canons derive the Principles of Practical Governance and are stipulated herein.


    The identifications, derivations, and the consequent specifications and requirements of this Nucleus shall constitute the Immutable Law of the Free Man, which no Individual or group thereof shall be authorized to violate in any measure or manner, at any time, or for any reason whatsoever.

    There shall be no valid means of affecting change of any form, nature, or degree to any part, portion, provision, concept, principle, or word of this Nucleus. The Nucleus shall remain inviolate in perpetuity, each man holding supreme authority to defend the sanctity and force of the Law Immutable against all who threaten violation. Regardless of circumstance or claims of license to the contrary, any assertion discordant with the Immutable Law of the Free Man is by definition and of necessity colored, and therefore false, invalid, and possessing no just capacity. No Free Man shall be obliged or otherwise compelled to comport himself in the least burden with such colored fiat, standing centrally within his perfect Right to refuse such mandates and challenge them to whatever degree he deems necessary to preserve the sanctity of his Rightful Claims to Life.


    The Orbit shall address issues of a changeable nature such that they may be altered through the mechanisms and under the conditions provided by the Immutable Law of the Land as set forth within this Nucleus. By no other means whatsoever is any word of the Orbit to be altered.


    No Free Man living under the Protections of the Law Immutable shall be compelled to comply with any Orbital Law that is in conflict with, or constitutes a violation of, the provisions set forth within the Nucleus. All Free Men are entitled by nature to refuse compliance in all cases where Orbital Law conflicts with the Rights of a Free Man or where doubt shall arise as to whether an Orbital Law conflicts with said Rights.


    In matters of Orbital Law, no Free Man shall be compelled to comply with directives of any sort that have not been incorporated into the Orbit by way of the complete and proper formal procedures. All Free Men shall rest firmly within their Rights to refuse compliance with any such imposition upon their Pleasure, regardless of how minor it may seem or how important or necessary, and regardless of how widely accepted by his Fellows. All such Persons refusing compliance shall be within their Rights to employ whatever means they may deem necessary to throw off such violations and preserve their sanctity.


    This Nucleus identifies and labels three statuses under which any Man may fall, depending upon certain, specific circumstances. These three statuses shall be “Free”, “Criminal” and “Under Question”. The terms “Free Man” and “Free Men” denote all individuals of Free status, versus those who have demoted themselves through improper action to that of “Criminal” through their acts of violation against the Rights of their Fellows. The status of “Under Question” applies to those who have been accused of having committed a violation of the Immutable Law of the Land. Such persons may be curtailed in their Rightful Claims, but only under very specific circumstances and in the most narrowly defined ways, given those circumstances.


    Thus endeth the Preamble.




    Government has no place in the affairs of Free Men, save to equally guarantee and protect their Natural and Unalienable Rights, and as such must never interfere with them. Governance may, however, be legitimately imposed upon the Criminal who, through his actions, has demonstrated his incapacity or unwillingness to govern himself such that the Rights of his Fellows are well and properly respected. Governing officials may, upon Oath and Affirmation of Reasonable Cause, investigate allegations made against a Free Man to determine whether he has violated the Rights of another. Such investigations must be carried out in the manner and to the degree permitted by the Immutable Law of the Land.


    Governing officials may also be called upon in cases of conflict between parties, but only when asked to assist in resolving the issues in question or in cases where a party to the conflict may be incapable of so asking, it would be reasonable to assume they would welcome assistance, and no compelling contraindication of the assumption exists.


    As with all Free Men, Governing Officials retain the authority to aid his Fellows in the protection of life, limb, and property.


    Governance must by definition be just in order to be legitimate. Systemic injustice constitutes prima facie proof that Governance is not in evidence, but rather that Tyranny and de facto Institutionalized Slavery are. Rule of Law cannot be relied upon to justly serve a Free People precisely because Free Men are never to be ruled and Law is too often reflective of the tyrant’s whim and caprice.


    Therefore, in order that Governance serve the Individual in a just and welcomed fashion, its structure, metes, bounds, roles, purposes, and granted authorities must be derive from a rational meter based in sound Principle. Such a body of Principle sets forth the objective standard by which Governing Office and its granted Powers may be specified, implemented, maintained, and to which its office holders are to abide in good faith and service and to which they are to be held strictly accountable for their actions and the results thereof.





    Article Zero


    The Canon of the Free Man



    This, the Canon of the Free man, formally sets forth the irreducible and apodictic Principles of Absolute and Unalienable Human Sovereignty and the Fundamental and Natural Rights that follow axiomatically therefrom.


    The Principles that follow herein comprise the bedrock upon which the Immutable Law of the Free Man rests and to which all other considerations shall yield. In those cases where conflicts between these Apodictic Principles and any other issue may be discovered, said Principles shall hold the absolute weight such that the issues and considerations yield without contention. The Just and Rightful Claims set forth herein are shared equally by all Free Men under the protections of the Law Immutable.


    Cardinal Postulate


    The natural and self evident status of each Individual Man is that of a Free and Sovereign Being. This truth is particularly significant where questions and considerations of the Individual’s existence with and about his Fellows arise. The sovereign status of Free Men derives directly from a single premise, the Cardinal Postulate. Once accepted, the Postulate leads promptly and axiomatically, to the Body of Apodictic Principles that demonstrates and enshrines the complete basis by which one arrives upon relevant Truth.


    The Cardinal Postulate states:



    1. All Free Men hold equal Just Claims to Life.



    Elaboration


    Whereas, Men may endeavor to assert all manner of claims upon Life that are of an ill-reasoned and, therefore, unjust nature, the Claim to Life itself is inescapably just and proper. The Just Claim of one’s Right to Live is shared equally by all Individuals. A Just Claim, being a Right, the equal Just Claim to Life shared by all Men constitutes the irreducible and apodictic basis of their Equal Rights.


    By its very nature, the equal Just Claim to Life circumscribes about each Free Man a boundary beyond which no other man may cross without permission. In violating this boundary one may be justly viewed as having reduced himself in status from Free Man to Criminal, or at least a man Under Question.






    From the Cardinal Postulate follow the Fundamental Principles of Just Claim:




    First Principles


    The First Principles are the direct, immediate, axiomatic, and apodictic inferences that follow from the Cardinal Postulate, thus comprising the body of Apodictic Principles upon which the Canon of Proper Human Relations is based and therefrom, the Immutable Law of the Free Man. The First Principles number four and are labeled the First-, Second-, and Third Fundamental Principles, and the Cardinal Prohibition.


    First Fundamental Principle


    The Principle states:



    1. Every Individual is the Sole and Absolute Proprietor of his own Life.



    Elaboration


    This is the Principle of Self-ownership. Being an owner directly implies the existence of the thing owned, which we call “property”, and the owner who rightly possesses it. In this case, the owner and the thing owned are one and the same.


    Being the sole proprietor of one’s own life carries with it several fundamental implications including, but not limited to those of maintenance and disposition. Ownership is defined as the sole right to a thing including the right to determine the disposition of the thing owned as the proprietor deems fit.


    No man may exercise an ownership right of any sort upon the Life of another Free Man without consent. He may, however, assert certain claims upon the life and other property of another Man as the result of the violation of the Rights of the former by the latter.




    No Free Man holds Claims to Life superior to that of any other, nor are they inferior. To reject this requires by necessity that one reject the Cardinal Postulate


    No Individual, group thereof, or other Entity may assume ownership of, or exercise ownership rights or such equivalent powers over any other Free Man, or group thereof, under any circumstance without the free and explicit consent of each Individual. Such powers may, however, be exercised over those Individuals who have been duly convicted of a Crime in full and proper accord with the Immutable Law of the Free Man. Such powers may be exercised only in the manner and to the degree specified by the Law Immutable.




    Second Fundamental Principle


    The Principle states:


    Every individual holds the absolute right to think and act in accord with his Freewill.


    This is the Principle of the Right of Action under Freewill.


    Elaboration


    Each Individual may act in accord with the dictates of his conscience as long as such action does not violate the Principles of this Canon. Circumscription of this Right may be imposed upon those having been duly convicted of a Crime in full and proper accord with the Immutable Law of the Free Man. Such abridgement may be applied only in the manner and to the degree specified by the Law Immutable.


    Bringing harm to oneself shall not be construed as a violation of the Canon, but always as being within the bounds of Individual prerogative. In cases where one or more Free Men act to thwart the acts of another Free Man that threaten his own safety, such Free Men shall stand fully accountable to the man thwarted for their actions and the stymied party shall sit in judgment of those who crossed him.



    Third Fundamental Principle


    The Principle states:


    Every Individual holds the Right to acquire, keep, and dispose of Property.


    This Principle embodies the explicit Right to Private Property.


    Elaboration


    The Right to Freedom of Action directly implies the right to acquire, keep, and dispose of Property. All Individuals hold the Right to private property as their abilities and material means may permit insofar as such acquisitions constitute no violation of the Immutable Law of the Free Man. No Orbital Law may restrict this right.


    No Individual may be deprived of his rightly and justly acquired Property except upon having been duly convicted of a Crime or been found to have committed a tort in Courts of Equity and in either case where it has been demonstrated that material losses to the victims were incurred as the result of the Defendant’s actions as they pertain to the case in question. Under such circumstances the guilty party may be stripped of rightly and justly acquired property to the extent that such property may serve to compensate victims in whole or in part as provided for in the Orbit.


    An Individual may be stripped of any and all property that is proven to have been acquired in violation of the Immutable Law of the Free Man after having been duly convicted of such violations in a Court of Law Immutable.




    The Cardinal Prohibition


    The Prohibition states:


    No Individual, group thereof, or other entity may violate the Rights of an Individual or group thereof.


    This is the Principle of Non-Violation or No-Trespass.


    Elaboration


    Under no circumstance whatsoever shall an Individual, group thereof, or any Agent, Agency, Office, Representative, or other Instrument of Governance violate or otherwise trespass upon the Rights of an Individual or group thereof. This specifically includes the employment of force to coerce or otherwise interfere with an Individual or group thereof against their respective Wills except where such Individuals have been duly convicted of a Crime in a Court of Law Immutable or in cases where an Individual’s behavior is such that it is reasonable to conclude that He intends on imminently committing acts of violation against Persons or Property without the consent of such Persons and Owners.


    Furthermore, those found to have violated the Rights of their Fellows may be held accountable for compensating those whom they have injured. Such compensations may derive from the properties of the guilty party up to and including the indentured servitude of the guilty for a time and in a manner set forth by a jury.




    Thus endeth the Canon.


    Upon the Canon shall all human behavior be measured and the Immutable Law of the Free Man based. Upon no other principle shall it be so. Any Orbital Law in conflict with the provisions of the Canon shall be null, void, and without effect upon any Individual, all of whom shall retain the full right to refuse compliance and take any action whatsoever against anyone attempting to force submission.





    The Canon Of Human Relations







    Corollaries to the Cardinal Principles


    These Corollaries follow axiomatically from the Cardinal Principles and the equal claim to fundamental rights that all Individuals share.



    1. Each Individual, by definition a Sovereign Being, is entitled by virtue of their Sovereignty to live freely and unencumbered by unwanted interference of any form from any source whatsoever, and to act pursuant to their uncoerced Will as may constitute no violation of the Law Immutable, whose Protections guarantee Personal Freedoms that are expansively broad while imposing stricture that is vanishingly small.
    2. No Individual, Body of Individuals acting in common, Agent, or Instrument thereof may act upon a Free Man in such a manner as to deny, deprive, diminish, abridge, modify, thwart, or in any other way violate his Rights or his exercise thereof of without his properly informed consent, and then only in the manner and to the degree to which he has authorized. Where any ambiguity or conflict may exist in the language of consent, each party is to interpret terms so as to impose the minimum trespass upon the other.
    3. No Individual may initiate action in violation of the Rights of another Individual
    4. All Individuals hold the Right to respond to action initiated against them, others, or property, that are in violation of the Law Immutable. Such responses may be undertaken for the purposes of defending themselves, other Individuals, or Property against such violations.
    5. Any Individual acting in violation the equal Rights of another places themselves in peril such that their own Rights may fall forfeit as the result of those against whom they trespass act to defend themselves.
    6. Any Individual injured or killed while acting within his proper Rights against another who has violated, or is attempting to violate him, the latter shall upon conviction be held trebly accountable in punishment and compensation for his crimes.
    7. A Right directly implies the Right to the Means of Exercise. All Free Men holds the Right to acquire the means to exercise any and all of his Rights such as his abilities and Lawful action may allow. No other Man, group thereof, Agent, or other instrumentalities, direct or oblique, may act in any measure or manner to thwart the rightful acquisition of such means at any time, for any reason whatsoever. The Free Man stands within the center of his Fundamental Rights to act against any violation of his Right to Acquire in whatever capacity he may deem necessary.
    8. The absolute nature of the Right to Private Property implies that all title to his rightfully acquired property is similarly absolute and allodial. Encumbrance may be placed upon property only through agreement and never by coercion or other force.
    9. No instrument of Governance may encumber legitimately held Private Property except where acquisition and/or possession is formally proven to be criminal in nature or otherwise constitutes a breach of the rights of another. Where legitimate questions of criminality exist relating to such possession, instruments of Governance may restrict the Right to Private Property until such time as said questions are settled under the Law Immutable. Property may not be removed from One’s possession without the disproof of valid ownership having been duly established.
    10. In all matters of conflict between Principle and Law, Law always yields to Principle.
    11. Interpretations of the Law must be made such that the results constitute no violation of the Cardinal Principles or any Individual Right following therefrom.
    12. Any Mechanism of the Orbit that interferes with Individuals from exercising their Rights and prerogatives pursuant to the provisions of this Nucleus is null, void, and shall carry no force of Law.
    13. Any Individual acting in a capacity of Governance is strictly and personally accountable to all People for every such action. Such accountability applies to all Individuals acting as agents, representatives, or other Instruments of governance, either directly or indirectly, under direct or indirect command.
    14. Upon satisfaction of a criminal debt, all persons are immediately restored to full rights upon release from imprisonment. Such persons may, however, be required to make material restitutions for their crimes even after release. Such restitution shall be in Lawful proportion to the losses incurred by those upon whom the crime was committed and as have been duly imposed by a Court upon sentencing.
    15. No Individual may be tried in Court for the same Crime twice.









    Corollary:


    No Individual or group thereof acting as an Agent of any Governing entity employ force against another individual or group thereof to coerce them into taking actions against their respective Wills.


    Corollary:


    Any Free Man or group thereof may resist any attempt at force against them by any Entity whatsoever and may take whatever actions provided for by the Law Immutable necessary to thwart the use of such force.


    Corollary:


    Any Free Man duly notified by proper and valid procedure of His coming Under Question must defer to the authority of the serving party. Such deference is required only in the manner and to the degree specified by the validly issued Warrant. No further restriction may be placed upon one so served and he may resist with all means at his disposal any attempt by the serving party to expand the scope of the Warrant.


    Corollary:


    Any Free Man causing another to come Under Question shall stand accountable to the other for the veracity and accuracy of his accusations. Intermediate agents of the originating accuser, acting in the service of justice, shall remain immune to such accountability insofar as their service has resulted in no injury to the accused beyond the falsehood of the charges.






    Exception I:


    A governing Entity, Individual, or group or combination thereof may employ force, individually or collectively as provided for by the Law Immutable, to force another such entity to execute acts it is bound to perform by Law, or to prevent them from executing acts they are prohibited from engaging in by the Law.


    Exception II:


    A governing Entity, Individual, or group or combination thereof may employ force, individually or collectively as provided for by the Law Immutable, to prevent the commission of a crime by a governing Entity, Individual, group, or combination thereof.


    Exception III


    A Governing entity may employ force against any Individual, Corporation, or other Fictional Construct wherein such has been duly convicted of Crime, to compel behavior of the convicted party as may accord with the Law Immutable.


    Under no circumstance whatsoever shall the collective interests of a group of Individuals be considered, enforced, or otherwise acted upon by any Entity in such a manner as to cause a violation of Cardinal Principles or any provision of the Immutable Law of the Land. The interests of the Individual may never be materially suborned to those of a collection of Individuals, acting in common or otherwise.





    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  4. #3
    Article I


    Entities under the Immutable Law of the Land

    This Nucleus establishes, as one of the Law Immutable, that there shall be recognized under such Law three categories of Entity to which said Law shall apply. The Law shall apply to all such Entities that exist within the borders of all the lands to which the Law applies, including its Territories, Possessions, and Protectorates. All that exists within the borders of the Land, its Territories, Possessions, and Protectorates shall fall under only one of the categories. The basic Entities recognized under the Law of the Land shall be called Subjects, Objects, and Fictional Constructs. All other specifications of subclasses of entities shall fall under the definitions of only one of these three categories and shall serve as nothing more than specific enumerations thereof.


    A Subject is defined to be any living being.


    An Object is anything non-living.


    Fictional Constructs are conceptual structures that serve specific purposes under the Law but possess no material reality of their own. The purpose of such Constructs is to serve as aids in understanding how the Law may be applied in specific situations. They serve as guides to understanding and proper action, as well as convenient shorthand terms used pursuant to the goal of facilitating communications. In no way whatsoever are such Fictional Constructs to be construed as having material realities of their own, independent of the minds that conceive and employ them.


    Subjects may be further broken down into Individuals, Animals, Plants, and Microorganisms. Individuals are Human Beings and any other living Beings determined to be sentient, and as such are endowed with Inalienable Rights by virtue of their status. Animals are rightly entitled to be free from cruelty at the hands of Individuals. The endowment of Rights upon Animals shall be determined and codified in Orbital Law where any conflicts between such Entitlements and the Private Property Rights of Individuals shall be resolved.


    Fictional Constructs may be granted Limited Rights or Limited Powers as set forth by Law. Such Rights are of a contractual nature and are not inherent to the Entity in question, but rather granted per the provisions of the Orbit. Under no circumstance may such Rights or Powers confer any legitimate mechanism by which Individuals, acting as officials, agents, or any other instrument of such a Fictional Construct, may violate the Inalienable Rights of Individuals. In all conflicts between the Limited Rights and Powers of Fictional Constructs and the Unalienable Rights of Individuals, the latter shall prevail without exception or discussion.


    Objects possess no Rights.


    Other subcategories of entity may be defined in Orbital Law but may not conflict with the specifications set forth in this Nucleus.


    The following specific examples of categories of Subjects and Fictional Constructs are given as special cases of particular significance.


    The Nation is a Fictional Construct upon which the People imbue certain conceptual characteristics, contractual Rights, and Powers as specified by Law.


    Government is a Fictional Construct possessing no Rights whatsoever. It represents the set of Individuals who at any given time occupy positions of office and special trust with respect to the administration of the Law Immutable. The various Entities of Government may be granted certain closely limited Powers by the Body of Free Men. The People may rescind or modify those Powers at any time by mechanisms as defined in the Nucleus. The restrictions applicable to a Government also apply to any subdivision thereof, including all Individuals acting as instruments of said Government or Subdivision. Individuals acting in governing capacities as members or other agents or instruments of such a Fictional Construct may under no circumstance interfere in the rights of Individuals except as provided for by the Law Immutable. No provision of Orbital Law shall carry such authority at any time or for any reason whatsoever.


    Government Powers shall never extend to allow for violations of any provision of the Immutable Law of the Land, whether in whole or in part. Governments are, by definition, comprised of and controlled by Individuals or Bodies of Individuals acting in common whose Rightful Authority may never supersede those of other Individuals except as provided for by the Law Immutable. Therefore, as Agents or Instruments of governance, such Individuals bear full personal responsibility for their every deed regardless of behest.


    Corporations are Fictional Constructs possessing limited Rights as set forth by the Law Immutable, as well as Powers and Protections as may be granted by Law through mechanisms as defined in the Orbit. Such Powers and Protections constitute Privileges that may be rescinded or modified by the People, either in part or in whole, either specifically to a chosen set of Corporate Entities or universally through mechanisms as defined in the Orbit. Actions taken by Corporations pursuant to those Powers and Protections shall not extend to violations of the Rights of Individuals or the Immutable Law of the Land. The restrictions applicable to a Corporation also apply to any subdivision thereof, including Individuals acting as instruments of said Corporations or subdivisions. Corporations are, by definition, controlled by Individuals or Bodies of Individuals acting in common and are therefore Agents or Instruments of such Persons or Bodies of Persons.

    Corporations shall enjoy the full Protections of the Law but shall likewise be held strictly accountable for their actions such as may constitute violations of the Law. Other Fictional Constructs may enjoy similar Protections as shall be specified in Orbital Law.





    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  5. #4
    Article II


    Enumerated Rights

    This, the Article of Enumerated Rights, lists and elaborates upon certain special cases regarding the Rights of Individuals as they follow from the Cardinal Principles. The purpose of this Article is to leave no margin for interpretation as to the precise nature of these specific rights as they follow axiomatically from the Cardinal Principles.


    INDIVIDUALS


    Right of Defense

    The Right


    The Individual Right to act singly or in groups to defend self, others, and property against all threats, violations, and trespass.


    Elaboration


    From the Cardinal Principles the Right of Defense, the Right of each Person to defend life, limb, and property of Self, other Persons, Property, Community, and Nation from any and all forms of trespass follows directly and axiomatically. Under no circumstance whatsoever may an Individual be denied the Right to act in the defense of his own life or that of others from Criminal Trespass against his Individual Self. As such, the Right shall not be abridged, infringed, diminished, thwarted, regulated, or modified in any way whatsoever.
    Exceptions:
    Where an Individual has been duly convicted of the Crime of Murder in the First Degree or of Violation of the Public Trust in the First Degree and to where the Law Immutable provides for a sentence of death and such a sentence has been duly imposed, the Right of such an Individual to Life shall be forfeit, thereby rendering forfeit his Right of defense.


    Right to the Means of Defense

    The Right


    To all means of affecting defense of life, limb, and property.



    Elaboration



    The Rights of Defense and of Private Property directly and unconditionally imply the Right to the Means of exercise. The Right of the Free Man is hereby recognized, guaranteed, protected, and shall in no way whatsoever be infringed, thwarted, diminished, or regulated. The Right shall apply to all Public places and all such Private places whereupon no rightful restriction has been placed by the Owner. Under no circumstance whatsoever may the material means of self defense be barred from any property serving a Government purpose or from the Commons.

    Those Under Question may have their Rights temporarily curtailed in accord to the maximally narrow specifications of a validly issued Warrant. Those specifications shall specifically list each right to be abridged, the precise duration of the disparagement, and the valid justifications for limitation. The Issuer of the Warrant shall stand fully accountable for the limitations specified in the document, as shall all Individuals who provided the information upon which the Issuer based his actions with respect to the Warrant in question.



    Exception


    In the case where an Individual has been duly convicted of a Crime wherein the sentence includes time to be served in prison, such Abridgement shall be permissible only in the manner and degree specified by the Law Immutable. Such abridgement does not, however, constitute and abridgement of the Right to Self Defense, but only upon certain means of exercise.

    Right to Consensual Acts

    The Right:
    To engage with other Individuals in any acts whatsoever regardless of nature so long as each Individual so engages with full, voluntary, and informed consent and that the acts themselves do not constitute violations of the Law Immutable.
    Elaboration

    Free Men are free to engage in any consensual acts with others, regardless of nature so long as such act do not constitute violations of the rights of others not consenting. Any violation of such acts that unwelcomely spills over into the spheres of the rights of others constitute violations of the rights of those others and must be altered immediately so as to remedy any injury or other violations to those who do not wish involvement.

    Such act may include those that bring harm or even death to the participants. Non-participants retain their full rights to act in whatever manner they deem necessary to protect themselves from the unwanted injurious effects of the actions of such Individuals or groups thereof.




    Right to Freedom from all unlawful government impositions

    The Right
    Free Men retain the right to be free from all government impositions that constitute violations of Principle or the Law Immutable.
    Elaboration


    All Free Men are endowed with the Fundamental Right to be left in peace, free of interference from outside parties. This is trebly so where the intrusions are by any agent or instrument of government. Any such intrusions may be resisted as necessary with no hazard of Law posed to one who resists.
    Exceptions


    Where an Individual has come validly and formally Under Question or has been duly and rightly convicted of violating the Law Immutable shall he be subject to such impositions as provided for by that Law.




    Right to Freedom from all forms of governmental theft.

    The Right
    To be free from all forms of coerced or otherwise forced taxation and other misappropriations of a Free Man’s rightful property.

    Elaboration

    The expropriation of rightfully held private property constitutes a violation of the Third Cardinal Principle. Taxation of the Individual, therefore, constitutes theft and is thereby a Crime. Any other expropriation of such property is identically criminal in nature.
    Any Individual attempting to act upon such unlawful mandates shall be guilty of multiple felonies of the first degree that include theft and criminal violation of the Public Trust, each offense of which shall carry a penalty of five years at hard labor and restitution treble the assessed loss as determined by a jury at trial.




    Right to Self Determination

    The Right
    To live and die according to One’s wishes as may be made manifest within their Lawful means, regardless of the nature of such wishes as long as any acts of Individuals or their agents do not constitute a violation of the Law Immutable and are undertaken in accord with the Right to Consensual Acts.
    Elaboration

    No Man may dictate against the will of another how the other shall comport himself through his life. The Individual is within his right to undertake and an all actions and endeavors and to hold all opinions such as he may deem fit. The single restriction upon action being that is not violate the dictate of the Cardinal Postulate. There is no restriction upon the Individual prerogative regarding personal opinions.


    Right to Reproductive Self Determination

    The Right
    To choose whether or not to reproduce.
    Elaboration

    Individuals have the absolute right to choose whether to bring children into the world. Women hold the right to decide whether to carry a pregnancy to term.
    Exceptions


    There are not exceptions to this right.


    Right to Free Expression

    The Right
    To think, believe, speak, and otherwise express oneself according to the dictates of one’s conscience.
    Elaboration


    Free Men are within their Rights to think, believe, and speak as they wish.
    Exceptions


    Free Men, though free to issue utterances threatening violations of the rights of others, with such speech they assume the attendant risks of defensive reprisal by those against whom the threats have been issued and/or those who might come the the aid of such people.






    The Right of Possession

    The Right

    The right to possess any Object, Idea, or Information so long as such possession does not constitute a violation of the Law Immutable.
    Elaboration

    The Free Man retains the Right to keep, hold, and dispose of anything, the possession of which he has come to in accord with the Law Immutable.




    The Right to Freedom of Movement

    The Right
    The Right to physically move from place to place by whatever means so long as such acts do not constitute a violation of the Law Immutable.
    Elaboration




    Right to Commerce and Trade

    The Right
    All Free Men retain the Right to conduct Commerce of any nature that does not violate the Law Immutable.
    Elaboration





    The Right to the Fruits of One’s Labor




    The Right to Equality of Justice under the Immutable Law of the Land

    The Right
    All Individuals have the absolute Right to Equality of Justice under the Law of the Land regardless of any characteristics any Individual may possess, appear to possess, lack, or appear to lack.
    Elaboration



    The Right to Due Process of Law




    Right of The People to the redress of Grievances

    The Right
    The Right of The People to petition the government for the redress of Grievances is hereby recognized, guaranteed, and the mechanisms for which are provided for under the Immutable Law of the Land


    Elaboration



    Corporate Rights


    Governmental Rights

    Governments have no Rights whatsoever, but only enumerated and strictly limited Powers granted unto them by the People as specified in the Orbit. No power may be granted nor may any extant power be construed as to permit the abridgment of Individual Rights except as set forth in the Nucleus.




    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  6. #5
    Article III


    Pinciples of Criminal Law


    Title I – Individuals
    Murder
    Assault
    Theft
    Endangerment?
    Title II – Corporations
    Corporate v. Individual
    Commons
    -Environment
    -Private property
    -community
    Title III – Government

    1. Executive
      1. Enumerated powers

    2. Legislative
    3. Judicial



    Title IV – Other Entities


    Operational Principles




    Article IV


    Principles of Equity and Contracts


    Operational Principles




    Article V


    Governmental Powers

    Article VI


    Dictionary of Terms




    Body of Definitions and interpretation of Terms and Law


    In order that the provisions and dictates of this Constitution be executed and adhered to in a manner consistent with its intended purpose, which is to secure the absolute liberty of each Individual Person in accord with the Canon of Individual Sovereignty, an exhaustive body of definitions for all the terms to be used throughout this document shall be made part and parcel of the Nucleus and shall reside in an appendix at the end of said Nucleus.
    In the event where there may arise any question of interpretation regarding the meaning or intent of any word, term, phrase, sentence, paragraph, Article, or any other component, concept, or structure of this Constitution, such interpretations must be made consistent with the smallest possible restrictions placed upon the Individual Person. and the greatest restrictions
    a strictly constructionist view is to be taken by individuals or any other Entities engaging in such an interpretation and shall always maintain the Principle of The Absolute Liberty of the Individual in the forefront of all considerations. Failure to do so shall constitute an act of Treason and shall be punishable in accordance with the Dictates of the Article of Law.



    This, the Law Dictionary, shall be the sole basis of ascribing meaning to all terms set fort in this Constitution. No other definitions may be substituted for any term herein. Any word within the body of a definition that is capitalized and italicized is to be taken as a term specifically defined in this dictionary and whose meaning is not to be construed in any other manner.


    Immutable Law of the Land – The Law as set forth in the Nucleus
    Orbital Law – The Law as set forth in the Orbit AKA "statutory law"
    Law – That to which all Individuals are bound to comply. Law derives from and is specified in the Nucelus and no other place. The term "Law" is not to be confused with "statute" or "statutory law" or "Orbital law". Law rests between Principle and statute in precedent of supremacy and effect. It rests subordinate to Principle such that it becomes more difficult to interpret the semantics of Law in a manner that violates the semantics of Principle.

    Absolute n.
    adj.


    Agency


    Agent


    Allodial


    Assault –


    Battery


    Capital - Criminal in the highest degree.


    Capital Crime – Crime of the highest degree


    Claim


    Common


    Common Law


    Commons


    Corporate adj. of, or relating to a Corporation


    Corporation n.


    Crime n. An act contrary to Right.'


    Criminal n.


    Criminal adj.


    Dictate n.


    Dictate v.


    FELON. - One who has committed a Capital Crime.


    Felonious – of, or relating to a Felony


    FELONY - A Crime of physical violence whereby great bodily harm has resulted.


    Fictional Construct


    Governance


    Government


    Harm n.


    Harm v.


    Individual


    Infamous Crime


    Infringe


    Instrument


    Limit


    Nation


    Object


    Person


    Private


    Property


    Public


    Right


    Rightful


    State


    Subject


    Theft


    Thief


    Thwart


    Title


    Violate


    Violation








    The penalty for any Individual violating another Individual’s Right to Defense shall be not less than 6 months or more than life in prison


    Crime of substitution of meaning: 6 months to life


    The Orbit


    • Section I: Government Structure
    • Section II: Contractual Rights (AKA Privileges such as voting)
    • Section III: Principles
      • Judicial
      • Executive
      • Legislative

    • Section IV: Procedures
      • Judicial
      • Executive
      • Legislative

    • Section V: Orbital Law
      • Corporate law


    Government structure and powers
    Orbit
    Trade
    Environment




    ***Cardinal prohibitions***
    Principles of Governance

    • governance functions may be brought to bear only upon those who have violated the Immutable Law of the Land (what about the accused?)
    • -due process
    • Grand juries
    • Sheriffs





    Within the Nucleus shall be contained Articles delineating, defining, enumerating and addressing the following:

    • The body of definitions of terms as they shall apply to the provisions of this Constitution.
    • The Principles upon which the Immutable Law of the Land shall be based
    • The whole of the body of the Immutable Law of the Land
    • Specifications of the whole of the structures, mechanisms, and granted powers of government

    INTPERPRETATION – principle – always broadest for ind. Rights and narrowest for governance.


    No governance as career




    From this Principle follow all other principles and precepts relevant to this Constitution, those of which shall be enumerated in the Article of Rights, the Article of Explicitly Enumerated Law, and the Article of the Cardinal Prohibition.

    Axioms




    These, the Axioms, derive naturally, obviously, and directly from the maxims set forth by the Cardinal Principles and as such constitute the remainder of the foundation upon the Immutable Law of the Land is written.


    The Principle of Precedence


    The principle states:




    The Principle of Interpretation of Law


    The principle states:




    The primary purpose of this Constitution and the governance it embodies is the Guaranty and Protection of Individual Human Rights. To that end, in any case where conflict arises between Principle and Law, that resolution shall be deemed proper which gives the broadest latitude to the Individual and the tightest stricture to governance.




    The Principle of Equality


    The Principle States:


















    ******* USE OF SUBSCRIPTING OF TERMS TO REFER TO THE APPLICABLE DEFINITION WHERE MORE THAN ONE IS AVAILABLE******* e.g., if “state” has 4 definitions:



    • “State2” refers to definition 2 of “State”.
    • “State2,3” refers to definitions 2 and 3
    • “State” refers to all definitions or the sole def.







    The Principle of Nullification


    The Principle States:


    .




    This goes under Law, Operations
    Any government or corporate entity including all subsumed entities, outside agencies, agents, employees, or representatives of those entities of any sort whatsoever that enforces or attempts to enforce such mechanisms shall be guilty of a Crime in the First Degree.


    The Principle of Criminal Debt




    The Principle States:






    Article IV
    Operations of Law








    Powers


    Governmental Powers and the Limitations thereof




    Enumerations of the Immutable Law of the Land


    The Supreme and Immutable Law of the Land shall be based upon the Primary Principle and all Principles and Rights that follow there from. Upon this foundation shall be built the Enumerated Body of the Immutable Law of the Land by which all Individuals must abide.
    The Law


    Herein shall be contained the Body of the Immutable Law of the Land.

    Section I. Individuals



    No Individual may initiate force against another Individual of Legal Age for any reason except as follows:

    • In defense of self from harm.
    • In defense of another Individual group thereof.


    Pre-emptive initiation of force against an Individual or group thereof may constitute an act of defense in cases where there is reason to believe that someone is about to initiate force in violation of Law.
    Parents may initiate force against their Children and Guardians against their Wards to the extent that???
    Section II. Government


    1. No government bureau, office, officer, employee, or other agent retained by any means or for any purpose whatsoever related to government business, may initiate force against an Individual except in the following cases:



    • An Individual is in the act of violating the Law
    • An Individual has been directly witnessed to have committed such a violation by another individual
    • A violation of the Law is apparently imminent
    • A legitimately issued Warrant has been duly served in accordance with the Law.
    Last edited by osan; 12-25-2014 at 05:13 PM.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  7. #6
    "Do as you please - but harm no other in their person or property."

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    "Do as you please - but harm no other in their person or property."
    I think my brother osan means well and is very thoughtful. However, he falls into the same errors of others who have insisted on a written Federal Constitution. (all of which are commonly known enough that I don't believe they need to be repeated here)
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    I think my brother osan means well and is very thoughtful. However, he falls into the same errors of others who have insisted on a written Federal Constitution. (all of which are commonly known enough that I don't believe they need to be repeated here)
    This is not a constitution - certainly not in the same way that all others are. This is a statement of principle and formulation of law.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Curious as to the powers and restrictions of the Legislative and Executive branches.
    Quote Originally Posted by BuddyRey View Post
    Do you think it's a coincidence that the most cherished standard of the Ron Paul campaign was a sign highlighting the word "love" inside the word "revolution"? A revolution not based on love is a revolution doomed to failure. So, at the risk of sounding corny, I just wanted to let you know that, wherever you stand on any of these hot-button issues, and even if we might have exchanged bitter words or harsh sentiments in the past, I love each and every one of you - no exceptions!

    "When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will." Frederic Bastiat

    Peace.

  12. #10
    "The best design is the simplest one that works." -- Albert Einstein

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Henry Rogue View Post
    Curious as to the powers and restrictions of the Legislative and Executive branches.
    Those powers are implied. You can structure them any way you wish. You can have a foogin' emperor if it pleases you. This document, as it stands, lays down the fundamental principles and the law following therefrom.

    Consider the structure. The Nucleus is immutable. Why? Because it describes things that should never change. Should a human right ever alter? If so, then it is not fundamental - not "natural" - not "God-given". It is, rather, arbitrarily defined and based on what someone, somewhere, thought to be a good idea at the time. In that case, we may say that nothing is sacred and that, in fact, anything goes. And, therefore, in such a case it is every man for himself with the Law of Arbitrary and Immediate Self-interest the true basis of human relations. If that is true, then we ought to admit to it here and now, and then go home, coming to RPF no more because we are all burning our gums for absolutely no practical good.

    But if it is not true and Rights can indeed be cogently and truthfully demonstrated to be naturally derivative of the fundamentally observable nature of that which every man is, a free and sovereign being, then that quality inheres of our very fabric, our DNA if you will, and is by that virtue immutable. If it is immutable, that fact should be recognized, formally identified in proper reason and observation, acknowledged for what it is, and made explicitly clear to you and all men that this is man's nature, that all men retain these rights under all but a very narrow, explicit, and rigorously defined set of circumstances, and that no man may legitimately embark upon the territories of another's properties without an owner's consent. The black-letter law follows from this as a raging torrent in natural, expected, predictable, and overbearingly obvious form. Acceptance of the Cardinal Postulate leads irrevocably to this position. Only dishonest, hopelessly and willfully ignorant, cowardly, brain-lesioned, or otherwise insufficient men fail to reach these obvious, natural, and vigorously true conclusions.

    If we all hold equal claims to life, then by no means whatsoever may one man be said to hold inherent authority over another where the other has not committed trespass against him. To claim otherwise is to accept as valid the grandest non-sequitur of them all. In conceding the absence of unequal authorities, the rest of the Law Immutable follows therefrom with great force and, once again, if you are honest and of nominal intelligence, courage, and training in reason, there will be no place else to which you may arrive. The truth of proper human relations is very simple, very clear, and very perfect. That some of the implications of the Law are not to one's liking, it does not follow that the law is imperfect, but rather that one's expectations of life and/or his fellows is not in proper keeping with good reason.

    To that last point, consider the example of the welfare state: those who uphold the notion may do so for reasons fair or foul, but let us assume for argument's sake that Johnny's reasons are pure compassion. He does not want to see children (think of the children!) go hungry. Because the very thought of it, much less the sight, offends his sensibilities so, he is willing to allow for men with guns to stand in threat of force and, ultimately, death of his fellows so that Johnny's delicate feelings on the matter will not be disturbed. It is pure self-absorption at work, often very convincingly wrapped in a cloak of apparent selflessness, expressed as their hand-wringing concern for the children. And yet, those children are no more entitled to their claims to life than is any adult or anyone in between. Yet his heart bleeds for one and stands callously indifferent at best, and often with a heart raging with hatred for the other, despite the fact that the object of his ire has committed no offense and caused thereby no insult to Johnny.

    But in Johnny's mind, the truth is apparently very different. The mere fact that the other produces is all the evidence he requires that the other must share in his "good fortune" with those "in need". Note that at the most basic level, the fruits in question are rarely viewed by the Johnnies of the world as products of honestly applied labor, but rather as the happenstance of good luck. We hear this language all the time by the Johnnies when they talk about the place of the successful man in the scheme of things. They ALWAYS imply or state outright that those who are successful are so only by dint and deign of random luck, implying with equally false reasoning that the industrious man, then, is actually not entitled to those fruits. In the distorted and demented reason of Johnny, the products of those into whose lap they miraculously fell are actually the property of the collective, which is all-wise, all-powerful, and all-authoritative to determine the proper disposition of those material goods and order by threat and act of force every man to comply. In Johnny's mind, the "lucky" man is an object to be hated for his luck because in his dim-witted thoughts, dint has made that man UNEQUAL to the rest and damnation be upon all those who so much as appear to rise above the others. Such men are worthy of nothing better than the whip, the manacle, and even the sword.

    The truth of who and what the Johnnies of the world are is abundantly clear, if people would but still their minds of noise and see with quiet that which stares them in their kissers.

    Back to the Law and your question: Orbital Law, being those things of a less abiding nature and therefore of changeable fabric, requires the instruments of that change. To that question I have given some thought, but am not expert enough to say whether my conceptions make goos practical sense. I have considered that perhaps a body such as a parliament or senate might do. The sorts of things they would discuss, Orbitally speaking, would be how corporate and other fictional entities might be regarded, addressed, and treated in matters of Law. What can they do and what is prohibited or mandated of them? An example of this might be food-labeling laws. If we assume we accept the existence and operation of conceptual entities called "corporation", we might also grant for practical reasons that they are GRANTED certain privileges that are functionally distinguishable from a fundamental human right in only bare fashion. Being granted, they may be rescinded. Being granted, they may also be circumscribed and the grant tied to conditions to perform. If you choose to form and operate as a corporation a canned chili factory, enjoying the privileges and perhaps immunities of the corporation, you must in exchange as one of the conditions of the grant, label your product with EVERYTHING that goes into it so that consumers may see what is good or not so good therein. I do believe this rests in perfect alignment with good reason.

    If you do not want to kow tow to the demands placed upon the operations of corporate entities, then do not form one. Make your chili as an individual and enjoy no immunity of, say, limited liability. You are freer to act, but you are also more on the hook for the results. If you have peanut product in some of your cans and a consumer becomes ill or, heaven forbid, dies from having eaten your chili, you will face the full brunt of culpability, accidental as your actions may have been. You may not face criminal charges, but you may depending on precise circumstance. At the very least you will stand equitably culpable for your torts. This is one reason to form a corporation. If a process goes wrong and bad batch of chili goes out there, you as a corporate employee, officer, or owner might not be held criminally culpable (might if you knew and sold product anyway), but would still stand responsible for making whole those you have harmed, however unintentionally.

    Therefore, the option is yours. Form the entity and follow the rules or be completely free and assume none of the protections. These are the sorts of matters to which Orbital law speaks and so speaking for all people of the land, there must be in place the mechanisms and other instruments for creating, reviewing, and repealing such statutes. And perhaps those are the terms to differentiate Nuclear from Orbital fiat. The former is Law and the latter mere statute.

    Anyhow, the structure of the legislative body itself is almost irrelevant. What is important here are the procedures, as well as the metes and bounds of authority, which are specified in the Nucleus such that they cannot be altered by a corrupted legislature. There is no mechanism of any sort to which the legislature would be able to point that would convincingly authorize them to circumvent the strictures placed upon them in the provisions of the Nucleus. Any claim to the contrary may be met with a stiff length of rope, and there I am deadly and literally serious.

    I envision a procedure as follows: all newly proposed legislation would go through an initial review, a basic sanity test of sorts, by the legislature, and I mean the ENTIRE legislature and not some sub-committee behind closed doors. All debate would be recorded for the record, to be placed in the equivalent of the Federal Register. That way, no man could repudiate his words or positions of Monday on Tuesday. Then, if passing the smell-test, the proposed legislation would be distributed to EVERY person requesting a copy - not a big deal in an era of computer technology. A website, for example, could hold the branch history of the document including every official change made thereto. This would be the peer-review period. Legal professionals would be enjoined to participate and offer their comments and observations. This period would not be a day less than one or two years. After that, the bill would be either brought up for a vote or killed. If voted on, it becomes law - none of this presidential signing bull$#@!. The legislators would be held responsible, both individually and severally, for the results of the law for a period of not less than twenty years following enactment. During that time, they would be required to carry liability insurance of a pre-determined minimum value against which tort claims would be made in the event their brain-children proved deleterious of the free markets.

    The two year period may seem too long, but there is a remedy for corporations effected in possibly adverse manner by "bad" developments: they may dissolve at any time and revert to plain human hands, the only hazard being the loss of corporate privilege. Once the legislation is repealed, they may reform and go on about their business. This could, of course, cost them dearly. That is what personal culpability is all about regarding legislators. With so much of their one bacon at stake, they would tend, I suspect, to be endlessly careful about that for which they would choose to enact. Keeping them quaking in their boots for fear is far more a good thing than bad. There can be a downside to this, as I'm sure you well see, but it pales in comparison with the benefits.

    Imagine a legislature with absolutely zero ability to alter the definitions of "crime", for example! It would be a huge step in the direction of proper freedom.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  14. #12
    I love this.... I have not read the above in its entirety (yet), but choose rather to digest smaller pieces of it so as to ponder their meanings with the intensity and inner-thought with which it was written.
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope

  15. #13
    And as far as whether or not Osan believes it can be accomplished... someone else has always already said it best:

    “Nothing is impossible in this world. Firm determination, it is said, can move heaven and earth. Things appear far beyond one's power, because one cannot set his heart on any arduous project due to want of strong will.”
    ― Yamamoto Tsunetomo
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by jllundqu View Post
    And as far as whether or not Osan believes it can be accomplished... someone else has always already said it best:
    I wish I could see that fabled determination here, but my hope is waning.

    This work of mine is a perfect example. Some might say it is too large a bite, but I disagree. It need not be taken as an overnight plan, or even as a plan at all. It is a statement of principle and a derivation of true Law based on the simplest postulation imaginable: equal claims to life. Accept that and the rest just falls into place almost as if by magic. The inference chain follows inescapably for anyone with nominal intelligence and integrity. Truly I say that the way here is narrow and well marked.

    My wish here would be that people would take what I have started and endeavor to understand it, see its truth, and integrate it into their world-views. From there, action will be what it will be - something over which I have no control. Slowly I am growing older and if I last long enough, will be old before much longer. It will matter not a whit to me what this world becomes, once I am gone. If it does not matter to those whom I leave behind, then the tyrants will have their brass ring and so be it. I, for one, cannot fathom how anyone with the least shred of personal industry and self-respect would stand for this even for the briefest moment in their thoughts.

    But I see how it goes, even here. All I can do is wonder why. After all, this is not rocket surgery, but it does require effort of a possibly alien form. I suspect it is that latter part that turns people away. Perhaps the change it portends is too deep - too fundamental for the average man to face? After all, to take this in, digest and integrate it well into one's life, and then to begin living in accord with the path it lays out stands to change many things in a person's life. We are well bred to our roles as cogs of Empire. Perhaps I expect too much that people would throw off the chains to which their genetic line has been trained by the whipmasters.

    I suppose I should stop interjecting my unwelcome opinions intended to save a world that does not want to be saved. Given this, who here is the real fool?
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  17. #15
    I would love to read it over in detail when I am not expected not to be online.

    The fundamental issue I take with this approach is that this bit
    In order that the provisions and dictates of this Constitution be executed and adhered to in a manner consistent with its intended purpose, which is to secure the absolute liberty of each Individual Person in accord with the Canon of Individual Sovereignty, an exhaustive body of definitions for all the terms to be used throughout this document shall be made part and parcel of the Nucleus and shall reside in an appendix at the end of said Nucleus.
    is admitting to having put definitions in the wrong place.

    The pragmatist would look at legal documents used EFFECTIVELY every day - contracts.
    A contract always has the definitions right up at the top.

    By making it an appendix, I believe you invite original intent types to consider that perhaps you really meant for this to be an afterthought. Afterthoughts invite doubt. Case in point: the Bill of Rights.

    The redefinition of words is the primary problem we have with our current constitution. 'Among' in the commerce clause has been changed to mean 'anywhere and everywhere'. 'Militia' has been changed to mean 'a cadre of state-blessed evildoers and mischief-makers'.

    I have the most concern over a missing definition - LAW. I know the concept of empire is what looms over much of your thought. Law is what looms over mine.
    What is law? To answer the question is to choose a form of government.
    There are only two.
    Statism assumes law is a set of "do what I say or else" codes. There is no philosophical reason for them other than that it is believed that they lubricate the function of the state.
    The other option is for law to be a set of well established principles which have been discovered through trial, the purpose of which is to govern the affairs of men with other men - and does not even assume the existence of a state, let alone that it is the primary actor and beneficiary of law.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    I think my brother osan means well and is very thoughtful. However, he falls into the same errors of others who have insisted on a written Federal Constitution. (all of which are commonly known enough that I don't believe they need to be repeated here)
    Murray Rothbard thought a libertarian constitution was needed as well.
    This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    "The best design is the simplest one that works." -- Albert Einstein
    The key factor there being "that works".

    I have been in the engineering design and management of huge R&D and other IT projects for 30 years and during that time I have always endeavored to Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS), but never in the pursuit of functional minimalism to allow an implementation to fall into a state of being simplistic. One must have that complexity which will deliver the objective into hand, but no more.

    I have given this a LOT of thought over the years and believe that this is in the ballpark of the maximally simple design that will render the minimal product. Logical design and structure has been part of how I've made my bones in the world and I have applied those practices here very judiciously. One-line quotes taken from men such as Uncle Albert, while good for priming the mind to a particular posture, is rarely a sufficient basis for managing affairs of even comparatively trivial sorts. Be careful with the avenues down which you put your thoughts because they can lead to places you never thought they would.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    I would love to read it over in detail when I am not expected not to be online.

    The fundamental issue I take with this approach is that this bit


    is admitting to having put definitions in the wrong place.

    The pragmatist would look at legal documents used EFFECTIVELY every day - contracts.
    A contract always has the definitions right up at the top.

    By making it an appendix, I believe you invite original intent types to consider that perhaps you really meant for this to be an afterthought. Afterthoughts invite doubt. Case in point: the Bill of Rights.

    The redefinition of words is the primary problem we have with our current constitution. 'Among' in the commerce clause has been changed to mean 'anywhere and everywhere'. 'Militia' has been changed to mean 'a cadre of state-blessed evildoers and mischief-makers'.

    I have the most concern over a missing definition - LAW. I know the concept of empire is what looms over much of your thought. Law is what looms over mine.
    What is law? To answer the question is to choose a form of government.
    There are only two.
    Statism assumes law is a set of "do what I say or else" codes. There is no philosophical reason for them other than that it is believed that they lubricate the function of the state.
    The other option is for law to be a set of well established principles which have been discovered through trial, the purpose of which is to govern the affairs of men with other men - and does not even assume the existence of a state, let alone that it is the primary actor and beneficiary of law.
    I have had this very thought more than once and am open to suggestions. It could be solved by a simple statement to the contrary, making it explicitly clear that the dictionary is in fact part and parcel of the Law Immutable. That seems pretty clear and unambiguous, would you not agree?

    Also, do not take the absence of a term as anything more than a happenstance. I was unable to think of everything in the 20 or so minutes I devoted to compiling the list. At that time I probably had larger fish to fry.... like feeding the goats or something.

    Please feel free to make suggestions. I do believe the fundamental structure is sound, but am equally sure there is plenty of room for improvement. But note to one and all that this is a document of pure principle and Law. Therefore, these are the strictest ideals. Implementation is for the Orbit because implementations should be flexible enough to be changed with altering conditions. Had implementation been hard-wired into the Nucleus in 1789, where would computer technology's role be today? Nowhere. Oh wait...



    ETA: I only just realized why you posted: the dictionary is in the Orbit. That was an unintentional error on my part. Good catch and my apologies. I will rearrange this immediately. Thank you.


    Merry Christmas, everyone.

    Happy Channukah.
    Last edited by osan; 12-25-2014 at 04:40 PM.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  22. #19
    just thought I'd give this a nudge. It's been awhile and someone asked about it.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    just thought I'd give this a nudge. It's been awhile and someone asked about it.
    premise is flawed.
    1st paragraph, second sentence.

    " I will add that for a first attempt at building a nation-state upon the notion of individual rights and freedom,"

    this was NOT the original intent. to understand the original intent, separate the Constitution from the amendments.
    yes, it is just that simple.
    it was intended to govern GOVERNMENTS. not the people.
    the original intent was to LIMIT GOVERNMENT. to protect the people from same.

    you are clearly an astute individual. I find it very difficult to believe that this flagrant oversight was not intentional.
    "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

    "for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson.

  24. #21
    a bump for the.

    mystical and magical OSAN!

    pointed question.
    was it to be a Federation of States. or...
    drum roll please... a..

    "nation-state"

    btw. the EU (European Union) is still struggling with this very query.
    is this news to you?
    (best NOT to play design engineer with me pal. I will hand you your ass every time.)
    Last edited by HVACTech; 11-25-2015 at 09:10 PM. Reason: cut the OP some slack.. and syntax of course!
    "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

    "for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson.

  25. #22
    Osan will not come out and play..

    me has the sadz...
    "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

    "for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by HVACTech View Post
    pointed question.
    was it to be a Federation of States. or...
    drum roll please... a..

    "nation-state"
    Fail to see why that makes a difference, what "should" or "was supposed" to have been.

    What it is, what it has become, is Nation/State/Empire.

    The individual states have become nothing more than vassal prefectures to the omnipotent fedgov.

    Just like the Anti Feds warned would happen, given the vast amount of power that was bestowed to the central government by the 1787 CONstitution.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Fail to see why that makes a difference, what "should" or "was supposed" to have been.

    What it is, what it has become, is Nation/State/Empire.

    The individual states have become nothing more than vassal prefectures to the omnipotent fedgov.

    Just like the Anti Feds warned would happen, given the vast amount of power that was bestowed to the central government by the 1787 CONstitution.
    Hello Captain obvious.

    Osan at least pretends to understand the "original intent"
    and pretends to have a "problem" with it.
    what "problem" do YOU have with it sir?

    why should I not support restoring it?

    "I want a Government so small, that you can barely see it" Rand Paul.
    Last edited by HVACTech; 11-25-2015 at 11:26 PM. Reason: syntax
    "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

    "for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by HVACTech View Post
    Hello Captain obvious.

    Osan at least pretends to understand the "original intent"
    and pretends to have a "problem" with it.
    what "problem" do YOU have with it sir?

    why should I not support restoring it?

    "I want a Government so small, that you can barely see it" Rand Paul.
    Obvious point is obvious: why would I want to restore what brought us to this bitter end in the first place?

    But listen, I'm partly busting balls here.

    I'd be happy to see a return to "original intent", if only as starting point.

    As long as we took the Anti Fed's warnings seriously this time around.
    Last edited by Anti Federalist; 11-26-2015 at 11:25 AM.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Obvious point is obvious: why would I want to restore what brought us to this bitter end in the first place?

    But listen, I'm partly busting balls here.

    I'd be happy to see a return to "original intent", if only as starting point.

    As long as we took the Anti Fed's warnings seriously this time around.
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again.
    Sorry, bro. I hope someone else will +rep you for me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    Sorry, bro. I hope someone else will +rep you for me.
    Osan is a pussy.
    and refuses to come out and play..

    MR Wordsmith. heh,

    AF at least has balls. unlike HB or Osan.
    I was trained in "control logic". is Osan under the "Godspell"
    HB is.
    I try to play nice with him.
    Last edited by HVACTech; 11-30-2015 at 09:12 PM.
    "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

    "for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by HVACTech View Post
    Osan is a pussy.
    and refuses to come out and play..

    MR Wordsmith. heh,

    AF at least has balls. unlike HB or Osan.
    I was trained in "control logic". is Osan under the "Godspell"
    HB is.

    I try to play nice with him.
    Another load of bull$#@! from you (no surprise, of course.) I have more than enough testicular fortitude to destroy you. However, I have wasted far too much time doing so in the past-which is why I keep you on ignore. I have made more progress explaining mildly complicated concepts to sub-par and genuinely retarded people in the past than I have with you. (even the retarded children try harder to understand things) Time is valuable to me-why would I or any reasonable man waste it on you?

    ETA: if anyone in this thread or the broader forum teaches Special Ed, mucho respect for you-you have an extremely hard job and tremendous patience. My current choir director/singing coach teaches to these children and has told me a number of horror stories about the experience.
    Last edited by heavenlyboy34; 11-30-2015 at 09:27 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    Another load of bull$#@! from you (no surprise, of course.) I have more than enough testicular fortitude to destroy you. However, I have wasted far too much time doing so in the past-which is why I keep you on ignore. I have made more progress explaining mildly complicated concepts to sub-par and genuinely retarded people in the past than I have with you. (even the retarded children try harder to understand things) Time is valuable to me-why would I or any reasonable man waste it on you?

    ETA: if anyone in this thread or the broader forum teaches Special Ed, mucho respect for you-you have an extremely hard job and tremendous patience. My current choir director/singing coach teaches to these children and has told me a number of horror stories about the experience.
    thats NICE! HB!.
    however..

    I REALLY am a high level HVACTech.
    engineering level.

    and yes! everyone should work at their own level!
    btw, this is a Political forum.. sorry if that disturbs you.
    the subject matter. at hand. is the proper function of the rule of law. in a republican constitution.
    did I write that too fast?

    (the phrase "at hand" indicates manual control parameters.)

    "Gospel" and Godspell" are synonyms.
    and are indicative of non-manual control systems.
    configurable relay assemblies (micro-chips) are best for this application.
    peace be unto you!..
    Last edited by HVACTech; 11-30-2015 at 10:04 PM. Reason: I was bad and mean to HB... :(
    "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

    "for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    ETA: if anyone in this thread or the broader forum teaches Special Ed, mucho respect for you-you have an extremely hard job and tremendous patience. My current choir director/singing coach teaches to these children and has told me a number of horror stories about the experience.
    I taught special ed at the second most dangerous high school in NYC, Evander Childs (now called something else). It was a truly miserable experience, especially as a shop teacher. On top of that, the other teacher with whom I shared the woodworking shop decided it was HIS shop and deeply resented my presence to the extent that the SOB left the power on when he knew my kids were next up. You do not EVER leave the lines energized when MS-2 students are shuffling in. It is a very dangerous thing as I learned. One student almost lost an eye, for example. I walked in one period to find one Frankie Romero about to swing a piece of wood like a bat into the running bandsaw. That was the same kid whose arm I broke in defense of the dean of spec. ed's life when Frankie moved to break a desk over his head while his back was turned.

    I caught a student named Elvis showing off a stainless 686 to another student while I was giving a lesson, at which time I told him that if he didn't take his gun out in class anymore, I would not take it away from him and send him to the ER. He said "cool" and was good for his word on that one.

    Another teacher named Spaddacino held peace officer status. He taught in the auto shop and actually funded it by working on cars. He had a loading press in his office and had students loading ammo for him. He had a 38 snubby in an ankle holster.

    I taught in NYC for 2.5 years before calling it quits - testament to how stupid I was in those days. I knew by the end of my third day teaching that I'd made a grave error. I left when I'd made the conscious decision to start carrying my 45 SIG at work. Not only were some of the students that dangerous, some of the parents were even worse, the sister of one declaring that her father and brother in law would be in the following Monday (it was a Friday) and that they were going to gun me down in my own shop. I came loaded for bear that morning but thankfully the irate father and said in-law were intercepted at the entrance to the school. Parent had threatened to kill me, maim me, sue me, find and kill my family, and so forth.

    I sent several students to the ER with broken bones and one with a skull fracture after I sent him down a staircase when he'd decided he would open my belly up with a knife. Been in tiffs with paid hitmen... no $#@!, I kid you not, have caught students as young as 12 $#@!ing in various corners and crevices of the buildings, have confiscated enough drugs that I could still be partying with what I took, more than 30 years later, and had to deal with bizarre $#@! and the endless enmity of kids who hated you just because you'd had the nerve to have been born.

    One day at Evander we had a riot that started when two gang members got into it. Evander wasn't that big, but 3000 students is still sizable (Kennedy had 7000+ in those days). About 1/4 to 1/3 of those were going at it right outside the door of the room of a teacher for whom I was covering due to calling out sick. At least 100 cops showed in riot gear and several hundred students went to jail that afternoon. Lots of pistols in evidence, too.

    The $#@! I experienced with these kids was enough to make you start losing your hair. In some ways it seems to be better now and in others it is WAY worse. What I recall was poor dear Kathy having to endure the nearly hour-long rants I'd engage in several days per week after getting home. I was so wound up at the end of it that I'd just go off.

    One need the calling to do teach in a ghetto school. Trebly so for special ed.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-17-2014, 08:10 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-11-2012, 12:58 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-03-2010, 02:26 AM
  4. Constitution? We dont have to follow any stinkin constitution!
    By PatriotG in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-19-2008, 12:13 PM

Posting Permissions

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