Live Free or Die

[Defender of Liberty]

I remember reading that an officer in the NH militia told his men that they should "live free or die" before going into battle against England's army. My understanding is that he was implying that they should live free or die fighting to defend freedom.

[Morgan_Freeman]

Quote by: SteveA We don't need passports to travel from state to state yet, but give it a few more years.

Actually, now that Real ID has passed, we do.

[Morgan_Freeman]

Quote by: Disinterested What's up with New Hampshire? If I'm not living free, do I have to die? Does that mean if I'm in prison, I'm obligated to either commit suicide or have someone kill me?

The slogan means that it's better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

[Chris]

Quote by: Morgan_Freeman Actually, now that Real ID has passed, we do.

Um how is that a passport? From what I heard it was nothing more than a standardization of different states' DLs

The actual DLs dont change but the DB is interconnected.

[SteveA]

Quote by: Nono An anecdote I heard is that some guy in NH was hauled into court for taping over the slogan on his licence plates and successfully defended himself on the grounds that if that slogan doesn't mean you can tape it over, what does it mean?

Definitely kewl :) Yes, that's New Hampshire.

I'd love to see the fully informed jury ideas in practice as well. As a juror you don't merely judge whether or not someone violated a law, but whether or not the law itself is a valid one. If a law said people were required to jump off a cliff, and someone went to court, it's the responsibility of the jurors to nullify that law and not hold the person guilty for violating a bogus law.

[Morgan_Freeman]

Quote by: |Chris| Um how is that a passport? From what I heard it was nothing more than a standardization of different states' DLs The actual DLs dont change but the DB is interconnected.

The details don't matter. The point is, the Feds now require you to carry "papers" when taveling between states or even getting a job.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Nurse Sheep The way I see it, gays and other minoritys now have all the liberty in the world to preach their causes rights, but no one else has any liberty to point out anything they say is wrong. If you disagree then imagine some current celebrity or even a newsreader saying something deemed politically incorrect and not apologising for it in any way, then watch how fast their career disappears from the radar.

So you are too cowardly to express your bigoted views because you are afraid of the social stigma? Both a bigot and a coward, what a shame.

[Osborn F Enready]

Defender of Liberty said:
My understanding is that he was implying that they should live free or die fighting to defend freedom.

I say:
I would have to agree that I also interpret it that way. And to me, it is self evident that without freedom, life is a sentence to servitude of one type or another. We sacrificed SOME of our liberty, as mankind is quite able and free to kill, fraud or do any other dastardly deed by the rules of nature if secluded from the constricts of society. It was our realistic view that extremely limited law, protecting only our most universally, unanimously agreed to crimes was a loss of liberty that was acceptable, since liberty without responsibility for your actions, is anarchy.

The goal was to start with "X" amount of government, and continue toward a line of self governance without a need of "National Governance". Unfortunately, central government lovers have pierced, and infected the politics of this nation, and now after years of mis-education, refocusing of goals, and illegal law creation/subversion of the constitution, we are forgetting exactly "who" we were, and "why" we got here.

Is it hard to believe when you hear the President sworn in under oath to protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, and his first day of business to his last he is hard at work removing the document from all forms of law?

Little did we know, our biggest enemy was from within, and we haven't seen it until its power has been garnered to near completeness.

For proof of this, all one has to do is carfully ponder your rights as enumerated in the Constitution, and then count how many currently enacted, and enforced laws remove those rights without your conscent, or ability to defend them without first submitting to absolute compliance of law enforcement.

A scham so well designed, most people still don't understand it even after it has been in effect for over 70 years.

A sad sign, of our sad situation.

[SteveA]

Little did we know, our biggest enemy was from within, and we haven't seen it until its power has been garnered to near completeness.

It wasn't totally unforseen though. We had plenty of people even when the U.S. was first created warning us against allowing things to become top heavy.

A scham so well designed, most people still don't understand it even after it has been in effect for over 70 years.

In a sense, one of our greatest strengths - popular feedback to restrain government growth - is in some senses our greatest weakness in that it assures a large percent of the populace are willing to follow things into tyranny.

A bit off topic, but it's an interesting anecdote I heard: We've all heard the about the story of Pandora's Box, where she open it up and let out all manners of evil into the world. Well there was supposedly a second part where she opened it again and out came hope. I don't know if this is true but I heard the original interpretation was that hope was even worse. I don't remember the explaination but I think it was that with hope, people wouldn't even try to fix these evils but instead would accept them and forever hope for something better. (I haven't read the story personally and am not certain what I was told was true but I found it to be an interesting thought)

[Osborn F Enready]

SteveA said:
I don't remember the explaination but I think it was that with hope, people wouldn't even try to fix these evils but instead would accept them and forever hope for something better. (I haven't read the story personally and am not certain what I was told was true but I found it to be an interesting thought)

I say:
Very interesting thought indeed.

Hindsight may be 20/20, but I think the Bi-Partisan monopoly either has uncorrectable vision, or, the most focused sight of any, and the signs we see are clear objectives of their goals. :rolleyes: