Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The theory of Divine Right asserts that God divides men by certain distinctions, Kings and Subjects, just as God divides the human species into male and female. The King is Sovereign, exercising supreme authority in all spheres of government, in all places subject to his jurisdiction; therefore, the King is endowed by the Creator with unlimited rights, for all decisions made by the King are in fact the will of God.
The Subject is inferior to the King, and must accept any edict from the King without question. The Subject only has those rights which the King permits. Those rights may be revoked, denied or disparaged at any time. Some Subjects will enjoy being in a privileged class (so long as they remain in favor with the King), elevating their status in both government and society, for if God can create the Distinction of King and Subject, then the King, who rules by the will of God, can create the Distinction of Nobility and Commoner among the Subjects.
Central to the doctrine of Divine Right, was that no Subject may question the King, for questioning any edict of the King was equivalent to challenging the will of God. The King being Sovereign over his Subjects, both Noble and Common, can only be judged by God, or another King, as other Kings rule by the will of God. Thus the Subjects have no power, on heaven or earth, to depose of their King.
However, during the middle of the 17th Century, a man named John Milton came to challenge the legitimacy of the Divine Right doctrine itself. Milton argued that the King's authority was derived from the people, and thus the King's power is only granted to him by Popular Sovereignty. Most important is that the people derive this sovereignty from God, and that these Sovereigns have both the right and the obligation to overthrow a tyrannical King. Here the roles of King and Subject are reversed, the Subjects are Sovereign over the King; the King only rules as a privilege extended to him by the people, a privilege that can be revoked, denied or disparaged at any time. Overall, the King is a Servant to the Public, hence the term public servant.
Um, please point out to me what is "insane" about his comment. The Tsaranaev brothers were able to get weapons. Adam Lanza was able to get weapons. Weapons are too easy to get in this country.
Again, it's an awesome racket the NRA and weapons manufacturers have. They make it easy for crooks to get guns, and dumb derpa-derps like you buy more guns because you are all scared and stuff. It's like arming both sides in a war.
What passes for "logic" among the CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood is the commentator in the video saying that it is only reprehensible to name a specific child, like MessiahRushie calling Chelsea a dog, and he says that the NRA ad that specifically named David Gregory's children didn't specifically name anyone's children so it is not despicable.
[
Based on Hitler's removal of guns and articles of artillery, he merely simplified the process of using big government power to commit his world-famous genocide of 6,000,000 jews.
[
That's the way it goes when you disarm the people you want to kill. Get smart, dammit Joe. Stop proffering propaganda against the common man with anecdotes of small misuses. There's a price to pay for freedom, but you can minimize that with good police work, which we saw with the apprehension and disabling of two terrorists bent on destruction of other human beings.
[
The same goes for mental patients. 98% of them can be ministered to outside Bedlam's walls. 2% of them will kill somebody else out of the small percentage who refuse to take their medication for their condition. We could stop it by spending several trillion dollars on full care facilities for all of them. Unfortunately, some of our society's best human beings are mentally ill, but able to live out 100 years without harming themselves or others with or without medication.
[
Not every single little thing is significant enough to pass a law over. Why spend $80 trillion so that $1,000 in damages per decade are stopped? It's overkill, that's why. Our founders knew the rules they laid out would work to do what is best for the most. The only thing we've really had to work out were the kinks caused by differences of opinion between northern factories and their southern suppliers of cotton for making America's clothing for hundreds of years. (beginning long prior to 1776).
Arming regular people is the best cure for deterring the evil of wicked men to kill innocents.
[
What's insane is whining about guns when guns are not the problem. Tell me you think that gun control will keep Cripps & Bloods & drug dealers from getting any gun they want. The Laws would only restrict ownership for law abiding citizens.
[
If you want to reduce mass killings by crazies, get the crazies off the streets and into therapy. Put crazies on the no-sale background list. Prohibit the sale of violent shooter video games too. Now that gun control is off the table go to Plan-B (crazies & video games).
[
If you were in Watertown yesterday, tell me you wouldn't want a very good gun to protect your home???
[
Based on Hitler's removal of guns and articles of artillery, he merely simplified the process of using big government power to commit his world-famous genocide of 6,000,000 jews.
Hitler relaxed Germany's gun laws, which were pretty strict after Versailles and the Weimar government. The guy who took all the German guns away was Eisenhower after the war.
[
That's the way it goes when you disarm the people you want to kill. Get smart, dammit Joe. Stop proffering propaganda against the common man with anecdotes of small misuses. There's a price to pay for freedom, but you can minimize that with good police work, which we saw with the apprehension and disabling of two terrorists bent on destruction of other human beings.
These aren't "anecdotes". they are cold hard facts.
According to the FBI, there were only 201 homicides with guns that were ruled "justifiable"- that a felon was killed by someone in the commission of a crime.
In that same year, there were 11,000 gun homicides and 16,000 gun suicides.
As far as the crazy shit that you need that gun to fight the "Gummit", the fact is, the Government will have tanks and bombers and drones and it's always going to be kind of a one-sided fight. Just ask the Tsaranaev Brothers how their war against the government went. It lasted all of four days. (Psssst. They lost!)
[
The same goes for mental patients. 98% of them can be ministered to outside Bedlam's walls. 2% of them will kill somebody else out of the small percentage who refuse to take their medication for their condition. We could stop it by spending several trillion dollars on full care facilities for all of them. Unfortunately, some of our society's best human beings are mentally ill, but able to live out 100 years without harming themselves or others with or without medication.
I'm all for sane, humane treatment of the mentally ill. They just shouldn't be able to buy guns. Why you think they should be able to is beyond comprehension.
[
Not every single little thing is significant enough to pass a law over. Why spend $80 trillion so that $1,000 in damages per decade are stopped? It's overkill, that's why. Our founders knew the rules they laid out would work to do what is best for the most. The only thing we've really had to work out were the kinks caused by differences of opinion between northern factories and their southern suppliers of cotton for making America's clothing for hundreds of years. (beginning long prior to 1776).
Arming regular people is the best cure for deterring the evil of wicked men to kill innocents.
The founders created a screwed up document that even our own government is telling other countries not to copy. Electoral Colleges and slaves being 3/5th of a white person... that was screwed up. So was writing a rule about militias that implied that any yahoo has a right to a gun without question.
What passes for "logic" among the CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood is the commentator in the video saying that it is only reprehensible to name a specific child, like MessiahRushie calling Chelsea a dog, and he says that the NRA ad that specifically named David Gregory's children didn't specifically name anyone's children so it is not despicable.
you know nothing of logic.
ok stupid fuck read his comment one more timeNice avoiding the point.
I'd like to know why you want the Tsaranaev Brothers or Adam Lanza to have access to weapons?
Kind of seems like a bad idea to me.
He did not make a point, he made an insane comment. Are you supporting his insanity?
Um, please point out to me what is "insane" about his comment. The Tsaranaev brothers were able to get weapons. Adam Lanza was able to get weapons. Weapons are too easy to get in this country.
Again, it's an awesome racket the NRA and weapons manufacturers have. They make it easy for crooks to get guns, and dumb derpa-derps like you buy more guns because you are all scared and stuff.
It's like arming both sides in a war.
What in the fuck do guns have to do with the bombing that happen in Boston?Yep. And you nuts and the NRA armed the fellow that blew up the Boston Marathon. Aren't you proud of your accomplishments? And when there is another Sandy Hook, you can brag about that, also.
Obviously I know enough about logic to so thoroughly expose the flaw in the "logic" of the video that you were reduced to nothing but a personal attack.What passes for "logic" among the CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood is the commentator in the video saying that it is only reprehensible to name a specific child, like MessiahRushie calling Chelsea a dog, and he says that the NRA ad that specifically named David Gregory's children didn't specifically name anyone's children so it is not despicable.
Obviously I know enough about logic to so thoroughly expose the flaw in the "logic" of the video that you were reduced to nothing but a personal attack.What passes for "logic" among the CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood is the commentator in the video saying that it is only reprehensible to name a specific child, like MessiahRushie calling Chelsea a dog, and he says that the NRA ad that specifically named David Gregory's children didn't specifically name anyone's children so it is not despicable.
Thank you.
[
ok stupid fuck read his comment one more time
What in the fuck do guns have to do with the bombing that happen in Boston?Yep. And you nuts and the NRA armed the fellow that blew up the Boston Marathon. Aren't you proud of your accomplishments? And when there is another Sandy Hook, you can brag about that, also.
How did any gun owner do to arm those people?
And what background check would have prevented a 19 year old from getting a gun?
The same day that the NRA's GOP minions decided that it was okay for a violent criminal to shoot me in the face, I discover that the Boston investigators are blocked from doing a thorough investigation because of the NRA and their allies.
Identification taggants are used to make it possible to trace explosive materials after detonation back to the source of the bomb. It is simple, cheap, and allows tracing to a point of sale. Law enforcement, the ATF, and others have pleaded for it. Clinton tried to make it mandatory after the OK City bombing. Current experts say it would have helped with the current investigation.
WHO would POSSIBLY oppose this technology?
The same idiots who oppose a background check for a killing machine....
[
ok stupid fuck read his comment one more time
What in the fuck do guns have to do with the bombing that happen in Boston?Yep. And you nuts and the NRA armed the fellow that blew up the Boston Marathon. Aren't you proud of your accomplishments? And when there is another Sandy Hook, you can brag about that, also.
How did any gun owner do to arm those people?
And what background check would have prevented a 19 year old from getting a gun?
Well, these guys were also able to get guns. One of them shot an MIT Police officer. So they were armed.
They were also able to get the black powder to make their bomb because you Derpa-Derps and the NRA fought restrictions on who could buy black powder.
VPC - Guns for FelonsHow the NRA Works to Rearm Criminals
Daily Kos: Bombing Investigation Severely Hampered by NRA! Demand Congress ACT!
The same day that the NRA's GOP minions decided that it was okay for a violent criminal to shoot me in the face, I discover that the Boston investigators are blocked from doing a thorough investigation because of the NRA and their allies.
Identification taggants are used to make it possible to trace explosive materials after detonation back to the source of the bomb. It is simple, cheap, and allows tracing to a point of sale. Law enforcement, the ATF, and others have pleaded for it. Clinton tried to make it mandatory after the OK City bombing. Current experts say it would have helped with the current investigation.
WHO would POSSIBLY oppose this technology?
The same idiots who oppose a background check for a killing machine....
Oh.... yeah. That would have helped.
[
ok stupid fuck read his comment one more time
What in the fuck do guns have to do with the bombing that happen in Boston?
How did any gun owner do to arm those people?
And what background check would have prevented a 19 year old from getting a gun?
Well, these guys were also able to get guns. One of them shot an MIT Police officer. So they were armed.
They were also able to get the black powder to make their bomb because you Derpa-Derps and the NRA fought restrictions on who could buy black powder.
VPC - Guns for FelonsHow the NRA Works to Rearm Criminals
Daily Kos: Bombing Investigation Severely Hampered by NRA! Demand Congress ACT!
The same day that the NRA's GOP minions decided that it was okay for a violent criminal to shoot me in the face, I discover that the Boston investigators are blocked from doing a thorough investigation because of the NRA and their allies.
Identification taggants are used to make it possible to trace explosive materials after detonation back to the source of the bomb. It is simple, cheap, and allows tracing to a point of sale. Law enforcement, the ATF, and others have pleaded for it. Clinton tried to make it mandatory after the OK City bombing. Current experts say it would have helped with the current investigation.
WHO would POSSIBLY oppose this technology?
The same idiots who oppose a background check for a killing machine....
Oh.... yeah. That would have helped.
Dude stop with your mind numbing stupidity
Did the 19 year old buy a gun on his own?
Do you know anything on Massachusetts gun laws?
Rifles and Shotguns
Permit to Purchase: FID Required
Registration of Firearm*: No
Licensing of Owner: Yes
Permit to Carry: FID Required
Handguns
Permit to Purchase: Yes
Registration of Firearm*: No
Licensing of Owner: Yes
Permit to Carry: Yes
*Police recordation made of transfers.
Massachusetts Gun Laws - What are the Gun Laws in Massachusetts?
Dude stop with your mind numbing stupidity
Did the 19 year old buy a gun on his own?
Do you know anything on Massachusetts gun laws?
Rifles and Shotguns
Permit to Purchase: FID Required
Registration of Firearm*: No
Licensing of Owner: Yes
Permit to Carry: FID Required
Handguns
Permit to Purchase: Yes
Registration of Firearm*: No
Licensing of Owner: Yes
Permit to Carry: Yes
*Police recordation made of transfers.
Massachusetts Gun Laws - What are the Gun Laws in Massachusetts?
Exactly my point.
Guns are too easy to get in MA or anywhere in America.
Why do you make my point for me and then act like you've made one.
you are fucking insane.
Exactly my point.
Guns are too easy to get in MA or anywhere in America.
Why do you make my point for me and then act like you've made one.
you are fucking insane.
Not at all.
These guys were able to get guns.
Guns are too easy to get.
Guns should be harder to get.
A lot harder.
[
Your insanity has made you and your opinion irrelevant.
Guns are very hard to get in that state what would have happen the the boat owner if the 19 year old had not been injured in the fire fight when the boat owner had went outside to check his boat out?
You do realize that if that 19 year old would have been found in a boat here in North Carolina their would not have been a second standoff with the police he would have already been a memory. Killed by the boat owner.
You're insane[
Your insanity has made you and your opinion irrelevant.
Guns are very hard to get in that state what would have happen the the boat owner if the 19 year old had not been injured in the fire fight when the boat owner had went outside to check his boat out?
You do realize that if that 19 year old would have been found in a boat here in North Carolina their would not have been a second standoff with the police he would have already been a memory. Killed by the boat owner.
Or....
The 19 year old nor the gun owner would have had guns because private citizens can't have them. Then no shootout at all.
BUt if there was a shootout, the 19year old would have won, because he was prepared and the boat owner wasn't.
