Slavery To Return ?

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by Carne Frio, Jul 27, 2010.

  1. Carne Frio

    Carne Frio Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    731
    Location:
    Near Fairbanks
  2. hogger129

    hogger129 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,152
    What do you think tax the working (extort) and give to the "don't want to work" is?
  3. MagnumFan

    MagnumFan Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    107
    Location:
    Midwest
    Middle class white folks are the slaves now.
  4. lentz

    lentz Former Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    606
    Location:
    Arkansas
    I don't think it will pass.But I didn't think obama would be elected either.
  5. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    Will this apply to those already sucking my taxes?
    Will it be forced upon the illegals?

    Who gets to define 'slavery'?

    Didn't we abolish it many decades ago?

    Seems like 'slavery' is pretty subjective. Kinda like torture.

    Billions more sent down the crapper.:rolleyes:
  6. jack404

    jack404 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,600
    Location:
    Australia
    Its all in the fine print and application of that fine print

    if they grabbed city kid's and took em to the country , parks service or farm service or emergency service work , that would help to distill a work ethic into those who are lacking in such , could be a good thing

    it also get's big infrastructure done cheap and creates skills in folks

    if applied and done right ..

    but there are problems in this too be careful this is a double bladed weapon
  7. lentz

    lentz Former Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    606
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Mandatory is what turns me off. I won't do a damn thing I don't want to
  8. wpage

    wpage Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,486
    Slavery never left.
  9. Blackhawk Dave

    Blackhawk Dave New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Messages:
    741
    Location:
    Denton, TX
    Biggest threat to our liberty are the unelected bureaucrats in Washington. They pass regulations and laws with nary a peep from Congress or a challenge in the courts.

    It's time to fire half the people working for the Government and eliminate Civil Service protection. If you can't fire the people working in government, it doesn't matter who you elect, since they're not affecting you like the government worker.
  10. jim brady

    jim brady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,395
    Never a good thing to turn your freedom over and entrust it to a government, even if it's just a little at a time. If you do, you will be a slave and not realize it until you are powerless to free yourself.

    Won't be long until these internet sites are shut down. You'd have to be blind not to see that one coming. Too many like us here are talking about it, and that's just too much un-checked power for certain circles to let happen.

    I hope that we can restore ourselves thru the ballot box. If not, things could get very ugly. Pray that some nut job doesn't set off this keg of powder we are all sitting on.
  11. alex.cirabisi

    alex.cirabisi Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    Messages:
    84
    Location:
    Midland , Michigan
    just gotta say... we have the power to take out who we dont want in power.. not take out as in "whack" but put someone we believe can handle the power... i bet this fired up the local malitia's when they caught wind of this. a civil war with the way the economy is and how the reps and presidents have been isnt an unreal thing... very possible
  12. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    NE Ar. W. of Black River
    The draft is back. Those on welfare will probably be declared defacto disabled.
  13. Haligan

    Haligan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,021
    Location:
    FEMA Region II
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2010
  14. belercous

    belercous Former Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    195
    Uhh, anyone actually read the bill? Sure doesn't sound like it. The bill calls for re-instating what used to be called "The Draft."
    Now, Viet Nam ended 5 years before I graduated H.S., and I for one am tickled about the volunteer army and believe that is the way to go. Some of my friends older brothers came back in a horizontal position, so I'm not really in favor of this bill, which will die in committee. It won't see a floor vote, it is political posturing from the left.

    However, in the interest of bringing out the truth of the bill, some things to note are;

    1. It's the draft. For some strange reason people are not just signing up in droves to be put in harm's way for a war began on false pretenses and not viewed as neccessary, and a war that is not seen as having a visible enemy. Who'da figured?

    2. It allows for non-military conscription in support of our troops. (Or should we not provide logistical support for our troops?) This is due to our "privatizing" duties which used to be performed by the Armed Services. Seems like we just can't get good help at a reasonable price when we're in a war and people might get killed. The free market kinda let us down on this one.

    3. It only applies in times of war AND requires the President (remember a Democrat won't always hold the office) to delare an emergency.

    4. Not everyone, or even close to everyone, will be drafted. Only as many as are needed. It will be done by random selection (a lottery). The acutal number likely would not exceed 1% of the population. We'd have to clothe, house, and feed these people so it wouldn't make sense to overstock.

    5. Slavery has not been totally abolished in this country by the Constitution. Anyone here ever actually read the Constitution? Please reference the 13th Amendment. Convicts can be put to hard labor (involuntary servitude).

    Now I understand that this is an echo-chamber wherein people don't do much fact-checking on things which support their worldview, but just because one reads something on the interweb, hears it on the radio, sees it on TV, or reads it, does not make it true.
    Please check out what I say as well. I'm certain that many here can't wait to discredit me. If only that were true for every bit of information one gets, the level of discourse would be raised immeasurably. It's part of being able to think critically. Try it.
  15. dbrodin

    dbrodin New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2009
    Messages:
    427
    Location:
    Duluth MN
    That is only one part of it.

    Nothing in the law supports this statement. You are hung up on the "draft" portion of the law. It is not limited to "emergency" roles. It even references the weather service (NOAA) of all things.

    Again you are hung up on the draft. The war clause only changes the rules from you pick were you go to Uncle Sam picks were you go. Also it's war OR declared emergency, not AND.

    SEC. 102. NATIONAL SERVICE OBLIGATION.

    (a) Obligation for Service- It is the obligation of every citizen of the United States, and every other person residing in the United States, who is between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a period of national service as prescribed in this title unless exempted under the provisions of this title.

    SEC. 103. INDUCTION TO PERFORM NATIONAL SERVICE.

    (a) Induction Requirements- The President shall provide for the induction of persons described in section 102(a) to perform their national service obligation.


    No where does it say anything about this being a national emergency contingency program that can be activated at need.

    Read the bill HERE. It's fairly short.
  16. belercous

    belercous Former Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    195
    Sec. 101, "3) The term ‘national service’ means military service or service in a civilian capacity that, as determined by the President, promotes the national defense, including national or community service and service related to homeland security."

    Sure sounds like conscription to me. What else is the reason for the bill about if not compulsory service? That's the main purpose of the bill.

    Sec. 103, "(2) the President declares a national emergency, which the President determines necessitates the induction of persons to perform military service, and immediately informs Congress of the reasons for the declaration and the need to induct persons for military service; or"

    Says "National Emergency" right there. I never said activated at need, although it would be self-evident that there would presumably be a need, in time of war, if people had to be drafted into national service. Yes, drafted. That's what it would be, or am I missing a fine semantical distinction?

    Quote; "Again you are hung up on the draft. The war clause only changes the rules from you pick were you go to Uncle Sam picks were you go. Also it's war OR declared emergency, not AND."

    Please reread the bill, it is "and" because sec. 103 states that a "declaration of war is in effect." No "or" follows this language, as such war is a neccessary condition. If there is no declared war this legislation could not be activated.

    Please read the bill, it is short. I stand by my previous post.
  17. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    NE Ar. W. of Black River
    Sec. (102) a. Wonder if it would allow for the conscription (impressment?) of all the employees of a small business if the business owner supports an opposition candidate. Small business owners need to hedge their bets by employing a larger selection of old farts.

    Just fighting fire with a little gasoline.
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2010
  18. belercous

    belercous Former Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    195
    Its kinda hard to write the suppression of political opponents into law. Remember, this bill would apply to whatever political party is in power at the time. And, the bill has a slim chance to even make it out of committee, much less to pass the full House. Even less chance to pass the Senate. It is pure political posturing. These were the same (type, not specific) voices who decried the original draft. It ain't goin' nowhere.
    Besides, have you ever known a bill that hasn't had exceptions & mark-ups before a floor vote? It ain't goin' nowhere. Rangle is only gonna use it for his constituents (how many co-sponsors does the bill have?), and fat lotta good that'll do after his ethics trial. He'd better settle (and I'd say he does, late/mid-August), because even if he gets re-elected, the House will refuse to seat him if he loses his trial come Sept.
    This is a big to-do about nothing.
  19. jim brady

    jim brady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,395
    Belercous - your's was an interesting post. I can start off by saying that you and I see things from a much different perspective. For one, I doubt if you will ever see the 'Draft' again. The Armed Services are seeming to obtain sufficient recruits to fill the ranks, and there seems to have been a surge of Patriotism after 9/11.

    Secondly, the fact that the elected President is Democrat or Republican makes little difference as to if we are engaged in war or not. Four shining stars on that point are Lincoln (Republican), Roosevelt (Democrat), Kennedy (Democrat) and Bush (Republican).

    You speak of "Hard Labor", and I assume that you imply that making little rocks out of big rocks in the old days before the reformation of the Penal System. Don't think anybody actually does that anymore. The prisons are now "Correctional Facilities" and not "Penal Institutions". Being incarcerated for violation of civilized norms is not "slavery". It is not involuntary servitude. It is civilized socieity's method of removing persons from the civil population as punishment and hopeful rehabiliation.

    I am a little older than you are, but I did not wait to be drafted. I did serve with people who were drafted, and we all did our duty. I think that by the time you reached High School and maybe college that the teachers and professors of my day were gone and more liberal thinking persons took their place. I am certain that they portrayed America differently to you than the country that I was nurtured to love.

    We are not perfect, but we ARE closer to perfection than any other nation in history has ever been able to achieve. In closing, you seem to have a distain for this Forum's readers. I don't think this is much of an 'echo chamber'. You and I certainly disagree on our view points. I accept your views as studied, but again we are not in total agreement.
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2010
  20. belercous

    belercous Former Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    195
    Jim; No, I don't expect to see the draft again. This was political posturing on the part of the same people who opposed the draft in the `60's. Now, for some strange reason, they think that conscription will somehow avoid wars that are unneccessary. They don't seem to understand that the draft in the `60's somehow managed to avoid the upper-crust. It won't even make it out of committee.

    Being incarcerated & put to work is most certainly "involuntary servitude." That is why the 13th Amen. specifically permits such. One would be a "slave" otherwise and have a cause for action otherwise. The Framers of the 13th A. knew what they were doing, that's why it is written as it is.

    I would like to thank you for your voluntary service, truly.

    We certainly are not perfect, but we (as a nation) are closer than others, our B.O.R. is a defining factor. This is about the best there is. We are in accord here. Other nations accord their citizens more freedoms, but our rights are enshrined in a constitution, not merely by law.

    I show disdain for those who can only see one view & can only parrot what others have said. Those who only quote bumper-stickers and have no analytical thinking abilities get no quarter from me. If all one can do is reply with a pithy quote from some right wing talk-show host and not explain the factual/reasoned basis behind their statements, then they deserve to look the fool. But I don't call them a fool, that will be obvious to others who think for themselves.

    I do see a lot of the right-wingers (that's no slander, I'm left-wing) here who offer nothing constructive/informative to the debate but their opinions. And we all got opinions. I just try to inject a little fact/other view to the discourse. Otherwise, it becomes an echo-chamber where some strange idea bounces back-and-forth until it somehow gets spit out as a truth. Witness the latest CNN poll where only 42% of Americans belive Obama was born an American. Just shows to go ya, that if you shout a lie loud enough, & long enough, people will accept it as true. People will believe the big lie over the small one, and it makes no difference if it's modern-day America or nazi-Germany. Loud, repeated, lies work.

    And Jim; we don't have to agree, nor do I expect such. Reasonable people can come to different opinions on the same set of facts. Otherwise their wouldn't be court cases. I see your view, and I'm good wit that.

    Too d@#%^d hot here to shoot so far this year. Rain or heat. And the heat is rude. Only got off about 350 rds. so far. Sux.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Gun Rights & Slavery Feb 9, 2009
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Constitutional Scholar Obama Questions Legality of Slavery Ban Aug 21, 2008
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum The Return Of The Firing Squad ...... ? Oct 13, 2011
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Return of South Korean arms Sep 30, 2010
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Claim our guns on 2010 tax return??????? Jan 9, 2010

Share This Page