Monday, June 7, 2010

Your Inherent Rights






Your Inherent Rights
By
Rick Mortimer


" In talking about 'rights', I'm inclined to define and separate them into
two categories; human rights (the God given right to life) and the civil
rights, which are legislated by the political systems we call our country,
democracy or whatever. "
(quoted from a letter by a Canadian to his local paper).


Yes, these are the two categories all right. And the ones you call civil rights are of course subject to the whim of the 51% in a democracy. That is why those rights fall under regulatory laws.

The others, though, (the HUMAN RIGHTS) are indeed GOD given. That is G-O-D and not g-o-v. These rights should be protected in perpetuity and guarded with your life. After all, this is what wars are fought over, The soldiers of the first and second world wars, protected them for us with THEIR lives so that we would be able to enjoy them in the future also.
But now, it is these very rights which are severely under attack in Canada. I don't think it's by any great 'conspiracy' or a trilateral commission or whatever, (although many people do so think), but I do believe they are being attacked by people in power, who have the mentality that they know what is best for the rest of us. This is what I call the Liberal left, or socialist people. They do it with all good intentions, and you can't fault them for their intentions. You can fault them greatly, however, for thier thinking that they, and they alone, are the only ones who have the 'key' to what is good for "us". This line of thinking is much like the belief in the divine right of Kings which was firmly entrenched in people's minds, until the 56 men set up the declaration of Independence in what was to become the USA. Until then, the idea that your inherent rights, came from God, was unheard of. You can bet the British Royalty did not want their subjects knowing that truth!

These are the rights that we refer to as ‘human rights.” These are the rights that I am referring to when I mention 'gun-laws", the National Firearms Act, etc..
...because it is these rights which are under attack by these Acts of parliament, under the guise of regulatory law.
Regulatory law: an example of which could be a tax on owning a certain piece of property, should not be used to interfere with your right to own that which is your inherent right to own. A firearm for protection is one example, the fruit of your labour is another example: the wheat that grows on your farm, or the things that you buy with the money you earned by being productive or expending your labour. When you put a tax on something that a poor man can not pay, and then imprison him for not paying it, it is the same as banning him from having it in the first place. That is an example of misused regulatory law if it is blocking him from that which is inherently his.
The taking away of your right to own private property is an attack on your inherent right to own the fruit of your labour, which, by the way, is the cornerstone of our capitalist system.
Another way to look at it is this: Government has no right to take from you that which it never gave you in the first place, because your inherent rights do not come from Government; they come from God.

When regulatory law is used to control your inherent rights, (as per the above example) then the powers that are using those laws in that way, are abusing not only the very justice system itself, but also their power that the people gave them in the first place. They were not put into office, whether voted or appointed in, to do any such thing as to use regulatory laws to infringe on your inherent rights.

The National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1995, (and many 'gun-control' laws before this) do exactly that. And what makes it especially galling, is that the act set it up so that the politician in charge of the Justice Department, can enact whatever new regulations he feels disposed to enact on any particular day, simply by making an order in council. HE NEED ASK NO ONE ELSE AND CAN TOTALLY CIRCUMVENT THE WHOLE SYTEM OF PARLIAMENT (and therefore the Democratic process) BY DOING SO.
Further: the NFA allows the principles set down in the act to be used in 'ANY OTHER ACT OF PARLIAMENT".

So, you now have a 'regulatory act' which clearly sets up a condition where your inherent rights can be snatched away by whatever powers that be in Ottawa. That group was put in power by 51% of the voters of course, but the use of those powers is not voted on in each case –we, the voters, assume that whom we elect will operate by principles which we vote for. Unfortunately, in today’s world, both you and I know that the parliament does not show nor give heed to "The will of the people". In today’s Parliament, if our elected representatives vote against the party leader, they are back-benched and threatened with political suicide. Hence they either oppose the vote at their own peril, or they simply do not show up to vote and by so doing do not give us –the people- the representation that we want and need to have.

To make matters worse, it no longer matters what or how the Senate votes anyway, because now the Federal Justice Minister can bring in any new laws or rules he wants to, and completely avoid having to go through the Senate and the democratic process by issuing an "Order in Council". (Let us not forget, that Justice Minister, Allan Rock, who was the minister at the time of the writing and passing through Parliament of Bill C-68 which would become this National Firearms Act, is on record as stating that it is his belief that only the military and the police should have firearms in Canada.)

We now live in a Police State because:
· you do not have the inherent right anymore to own the fruit of your own labour (Private property), and your private property can be outlawed and confiscated at any time the government wants it to be. (firearms, for one example.)
· You do not have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
· You do not have the right to council.
· You do not have the right to silence.
· You do not have the right to protect yourself or your property.
You do not...........you get the picture.
(….and you certainly do not have any representation in the political system anymore)

Right there, go your inherent rights. Period.

This has come about because some people believe that they know what is best for the others, and they are not about to run it by you first to see what you think of their wonderful ideas.
This is simply a pattern of history. It is being repeated over and over again all around the world. Hence the saying " Those that don't study the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it."
· Joseph Stalin said he knew what was best for his people. So he murdered 20 million of them to make them fall in line with his thinking.
· Mao killed , I believe, 30 million, for the same reason.
· Hitler killed 6 million for the same reasons.

there's more.......
How many have been killed in Rwanda now, and 'socialist' African countries for the same reason that SOMEONE just knew that he had the key for a better way of life that the common fellow had to be force fed? These people are referred to as social architects or social engineers, and when they use the regulatory laws to infringe on your inherent rights, it creates noncompliance with the laws of the land and can escalate from there into open rebellion, because people will fight, as a last recourse to keep their inherent rights intact.

Problem is, without small arms, the population has no way to protect itself from these dictators. None at all. That is historic fact.
So then, when your rights come from Government, they can be taken away by Government. When you have no means to resist, you will have these rights taken away from you by people "who know what is better for you than you do." (in Canada we call it 'social engineering' to quote the liberal party.) It is important to note here, that for anything to be forced upon you, you must have no 'means to resist' it. Nothing can be imposed upon you if you have the means to resist it. (This is the whole point of the second amendment in the USA constitution)
This is historic fact.
All of this does not point to some conspiracy theory of world control. (although there are many who believe it does, and it can sure appear that way.) It does however point to people who have not studied the lessons of history, when they let it happen to themselves. Who was it that said, "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." I think it was Thomas Paine, or perhaps it was Benjamin Franklin?

This is why the whole argument is not about 'gun control'. It is not even about guns. It is not about 'men and their toys' or a bunch of people who simply don't want to be in the powerless 49% in a democracy, and are whining about it.
It is about your freedom. It is about your inherent right to live in society as an honest member of that society who recognizes that he/she has the right to better themselves through their own labour, and personal achievements, and to protect their own life and the lives of their families. It is about your right to not be threatened with violence nor with long term imprisonment by your government, because you believe in owning the one tool that will guarantee these rights are not infringed upon by men who would have you doing what they desire you to do.

That is what it is all about.

There is a whole culture in Canadian society who believe that their inherent rights are now seriously under attack in Canada. They are starting to believe that nothing short of civil disruption will stop the attack on our inherent rights, by the 'social engineers.' Whether you believe that the agenda of the engineers is global, or simply more personal, bears not one whit of difference as to the result of the actions of these social engineers.
The whole point in trying to educate oneself, and other people, to the lessons of history, is to try and avert that battle, isn't it? To be able to help other people see what is going on so that the 51% can decide on what to do? Since Canada is a democracy and not a republic (in a Republic, inherent rights are protected by law under a constitution), the only tool that the people can use to attempt to retain their rights is to educate themselves and so protect themselves from the grief of repeating bad history. The question in a Democracy then, becomes: “Who is doing the educating?|

Many Canadians believe that the need for protection is here in our society now - today. Many believe that at this time in Canada, our inherent rights are under attack as never before in the history of this country. This is why the rate of noncompliance with the National Firearms Act of 1995 (Bill C-68) is so high across the country.

This is a cultural thing. It is not about a bunch of 'gun nuts' wanting to play Daniel Boone or 'little boys who want-to-be cops.” It is about your neighbours and your children and your countrymen who believe that they are doing no wrong, that they have the inherent right to posses the one thing that will guarantee that no government men will come and bust their door down in the middle of the night and drag them and their families off to the gulag.
History has shown that men who believe themselves to be in the right, and who feel that their freedom is being taken away, will fight.