Conservative Daily News - The best news, analysis and opinion articles written by a collection of citizen journalists. Covering a range of important topics in blogs, op-ed, and news posts, these upstanding patriots are bringing back American exceptionalism with every entry..

The Case for Liberty and an Article V Convention – Part III

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “The Case for Liberty and an Article V Convention – Part III”.

Conservative Daily News allows a great deal of latitude in the topics contributors choose and their approaches to the content. This is due to our approach that citizens have a voice, not only the mass media. Readers will likely not agree with every contributor or every post, but find reasons to think about the topic and respond with comments. We value differing opinions as well as those that agree. Opinions of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of CDN, Anomalous Media or staff. Click here if you'd like to write for CDN.
Put This Story in your Circles and Share with your Friends

Tags: , , , , ,

Comments (1)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Derrell Poole says:

    Thanks Bruce. This is very interesting and informative. As I read the changes you suggest I was hoping you might have thoughts concerning the vast overreach of power the Federal Government has granted itself thru National Police forces. As I’m sure you realize the founding authors were a bit dubious of even granting the Federal government a National Military.

    I believe it was in the 1920s that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was formed as an unarmed investigative force for the Justice Department. In the ’30s, iirc, Hoover managed to get his bureau armed in order to fight the interstate crime wave then under way. Our first National Police force – at least that I am aware of. Since then there has been a flurry of National Police forces including the ATF and much of the Dept of Homeland Security.

    Under the Current Law of the Land and the Spirit and intent it was written in – that is, the protection of our individual rights – these National Police forces are ILLEGAL! As you pointed out Article I Section 8 is clear about the powers the Fed is authorized to have. To wit;

    “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress; …”

    In other word the intent of the Constitution was that while the Federal government was to provide for a State Militia as required to enforce the laws, repress insurrections and repel invaders it is the State’s right to operate the Militia for said purposes.

    WHERE is there any provision WHATSOEVER for a National Police force? Perhaps we are so addicted to the FBI that we cringe at the thought of it “Going AWAY” but if we are the Constitutionalists we claim to be are we not failing our purpose by excusing this situation?

    And in light of all of the abuse of power by this Administration, are not the president’s own words “…we need a national security force just as strong” [as our military force] indeed very frightening? This man wants his very own Schutzstaffel!!! Presumably armed and equipped just like the Military – tanks, Armoured Fighting Vehicles Strike Aircraft, unmaned drones artillery, missiles and special forces (just like our military – just as strong – Who else in the 20th Century had a National Security force just as strong – even stronger that the military? They Called it the Waffen SS!) And he practically has one in the form of the FBI, the ATF, the DEA, the DHS, FEMA, Armed IRS agents and Postal Police AND the Secret Service – and who knows what else?! Do they not look like the military when the storm the homes of New Orleans and Boston?

    I would be very curious as to how you might address this in a Constitutional Convention.