Mr. Beck, I'll be honest: I can't stand your ass, but what you said was right on. Where you lost me was the 3 great individuals you mentioned DIDNT HAVE SECURITY AND YOU DO. IF you are so anti violence drop the million dollar price tag on your security detail. Let me borrow or have about 75k to get my life straight and practice what you preach. Freddie Veltz III
Well Said Glenn, unfortunately you will never be appreciated as much as you will until History looks back at you. Unfortunately you offend peoples agenda so you have become a target. This is the sad part of the world. I pray for you salvation and pray for your eyes, and you to not need security anymore in Jesus name!
I fear the day we wake up in America and see DC under siege. I pray it doesn't happen but I sense violence is on its way. I don't equate this incident in Tucson but when freedoms are taken away that is when militias may rise up and shoot up everything in sight. I prefer to pray and bring people together.
I'm with all on the non-violence issue right up until the government starts perpetrating violence or direct tyranny on Americans. They've done it before in this Country. IF they do it again during my lifetime, I will fight back with deadly force. I consider that defensive violence.
Other circumstances which justify a violent defense would be the declaration of Martial Law in America. No such authority is granted by the U.S. Constitution under ANY circumstances. It only addresses the suspension of "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus" being suspended (That is NOT the same as declaring Martial Law) but ONLY in cases of "Rebellion or Invasion" and ONLY if "the Public Safety may require it".
Therefore, I do not see any circumstance whereby the privilege of Writ of Habeas Corpus may be suspended legitimately. IF we're already involved in a rebellion "or Civil War" or under "invasion" then I do not see any way that suspending the Writ privilege or suspending fundamental human rights, especially those that are constitutionally protected IN WRITING (not to mention all those rights we still have which were not even mentioned other than by a general reference in the U.S. Constitution), would advance the Public Safety. Quite the contrary, suspending those rights under those circumstances would actually promote LESS PUBLIC SAFETY by disallowing the people from exercising their fundamental human right to self-defense (or, in other words, defending their "UNALIENABLE right to life and liberty.")
Any declaration of Martial Law is a defacto declaration of War on the American people, their constitution and liberties and should rightfully be met with opposing deadly force.