The Constitution is for the Domestic Terrorist. Pt. 1
According to the ACLU website which has a great article discussing the Patriot Act which can be found here. Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Pub. L. No. 107-52) A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act "dangerous to human life" that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism.
I want to bring forth the reality that terrorism is solely a political perspective and that any attempts to quell it are against the Constitution and therefore protected, in America, by the Constitution. This is to include the radical idea that some evil, vengeful, Islamic Radical, Neo-Nazi, AntiFa, Democrat, Republican, or Anarchist has the protection of the constitution to build a militia, spread propaganda, and work towards the overthrow of the government. The Constitution is a foundation of protection for those who hate the government and wish to dismantle it, fight it, and establish something new. I'm going to go through a few of the the fundamental aspects of that document to show how we as Americans are supposed to use it for its intended purpose.
Something to remember,
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
First Amendment of the United States of America
A man decides to start speaking about overthrowing the government. He starts a blog, self publishes a book, begins to spread his message across the land. He starts to pick up a following and gets on the radar of the government and is arrested. The things he speaks about are deemed to be "anti-American" and a "threat to national security". The First Amendment was established so he could do these very things. It was written to keep the government from stopping his actions. This is where the government, by way of law enforcement, attempts to stop an uprising, revolution, and descent. Every law passed, that makes it easier for law enforcement to accomplish this goal, is a blatant disregard for the First Amendment.
Americans have the ability to voice their opinion on foreign policy. If one were so inclined, they should be able to say without fear that they support the political ideology of communism, or theocracy. Hell, they should be able to support the people of Isis if they wanted to. Isis is a political organization in the middle east that is attempting to unite the countries of Iraq and Syria. That is a Geo-Political stance. However, the world we live in where fear is spoon fed to the masses along with misinformation makes it virtually impossible to know the truths of what is happening elsewhere. Showing support for what the government deems an enemy is a basis for being thrown in a prison having your due process suspended, having your citizenship stripped away, never given a trial, or even killed. That is how the laws are written, to disrupt the building of a movement that will eliminate the State.
Something to remember,
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." - Benjamin Franklin
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Second Amendment of the United States of America
Clearly, this one doesn't need an explanation. However considering the push for gun control with all the mass shootings happening, perhaps I should reiterate some realities. How is one expected to overthrow the government without guns? A militia is basically a group of people who work together with similar ideologies, usually political and tend to be armed. If I know ten people who all own guns, and we decide to the latest local ordinance is stepping over the bounds and trampling our freedom, or our government has gone too far and we meet up to address this issue, whether we train every weekend or not, we can be considered a militia. The purpose is to address our grievances on a level that was not recognized when we used our first amendment right. In other words, we told you we had a problem, you didn't listen. We asked you to fix the problem, you didn't. Now we will handle the problem.
What good is a government that doesn't listen to the people it governs? If it doesn't address the issues of the people it represents? A government whose sole purpose has become to extend its own power and preserve its existence. A government run by business and money is not a government by the people or for the people. It is a government by money, for money.
The second amendment was to allow the revolutionary, the anarchist, the people ready to commit high treason, like that of the founding fathers, to have access to the armaments necessary to attempt to overthrow the government when it got out of hand, because...
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson
