Well, I never thought that I would see the day when a US Representative, even a Tea Party loon, like Andy “Dr. No” Harris, would seek to violate his oath of office and incite people to overthrow the US government! On Saturday, February 16th, at Harris’ “Town Hall Meeting On Guns and Violence”, in Ocean City, MD, that’s exactly what happened!
Harris approves the overthrow of the US government!
In a room of 200 or so, with about 15-20 supporters of stricter regulations, and the rest, a mix of passive to outright raging gun supporters, Harris stood up and said that “…examples exist to support the idea that the people have a right to rise up and overthrow a tyrannical government!” His outrageous comment was in response to a statement I had made, that “there is nothing in the Constitution that gives anyone the right to overthrow the government.” He then proceeded to support his statement with the example of “Athen’s Rebellion”, where, in 1946 Athens, Tennessee, several hundred GIs, broke into the National Guard Armory, stole weapons, then attacked the local Sheriff’s Office and County Jail.
Suffice it to say, that the prevailing political machine that had dominated Athens and the surrounding towns for many years, certainly were acting illegally, by counting ballots in private, without the ability of opponents to oversee them. The GIs, after having returned from WWII, fighting for Democracy, were not going to let the local political bosses deny them of the very rights they had been fighting and dying for. The Sheriff, under the thumb of the Mayor, a boss tweed type, if ever there was one, had been threatening people throughout that election day, harassing voters and poll judges alike. A Deputy even shot one black voter who had tried to vote “the wrong way!”
“We need our guns to protect our liberties!”
Needless to say, tempers were hot. By evening, several hundred GIs and their supporters, armed with rifles and some home-made explosives, assaulted the County Jail, where the Sheriff and Mayor had ended up, after absconding with the ballot boxes. Before the boxes were opened, the GIs attacked and eventually used the explosives to blow open the doors, at which time, the Sheriff and his men surrendered. The GIs went in, took control of the ballot boxes and removed them to a safe location, where the ballots were counted, in public view! The vote was, without a doubt, in favor of the GI candidates who were running for Mayor, Sheriff and other City and County positions.
Now, we can certainly look back on this event and say, “The GIs were right to do what they did.” In fact, no one who participated in the action was ever prosecuted! But, we also have to ask, “Is this really how we want to run our Democracy?” If so, then what will keep the “bosses” from getting more people and more guns next time, to take the ballot boxes back? By approving of this kind of action, we are supporting anarchy, pure and simple. Forget the rule of law and 200+ years of legal precedents. ”Mob rule” will control.
This is what Harris was advocating and giving a nod to last Saturday! Anarchy! Overthrow of the government! The ones with the guns make the rules!
“FIGHT TYRANNY – Enjoy Liberty!”
My own belief is that Congressman Harris should be censured by his House colleagues, at the very least. This type of behavior, especially in light of the recent mass killings, as well as comments by the gun advocates at the meeting, who predicted that “blood will be spilled” with any new regulations that become law, is unacceptable from our elected officials. By advocating and supporting these kinds of illegal activities, he is violating his oath, to uphold the Constitution and the law. If not prosecuted or censured, he should surely be shown the EXIT door on election day, 2014!
Comments on: "Harris Incites Pro-Gun Crazies To Overthrow The Government!" (3)
Reblogged this on Beyond the Barricade and commented:
I’d say that DelMarva Progressive is right about this one. There is nothing in the Constitution that justifies overthrowing the government. Harris must have forgot that such justification is in the Declaration of Independence. This “right” is clearly defined. This passage from the Declaration is as follows: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security” (http://usconstitution.net/declar.html). I am not saying that we live under absolute despotism. Yes the American government is corrupted by money. It always has been even since the time of Washington. If you don’t believe me, please be my guest and read Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. Now, as some have said, the government doesn’t need to take your guns. They already have enough. Furthermore, as peace activist David Swanson has written, “the Right-To-Bring-Assault-Weapons-to-School Second Amendment turns out to have its origins in an attempt to avoid maintaining standing armies. In place of standing armies, the states of the new United States were to create well-regulated militias…Bearing arms in a well-regulated militia did not mean bearing guns that can reliably shoot well, since such didn’t exist. It certainly didn’t mean bearing guns that can kill entire crowds of people without reloading. It didn’t mean bearing arms outside of the well regulated militia. Much less did it mean bearing arms in school and church and Wal-Mart…The Second and Third amendments originated as restrictions on what we would later create and come to call a Military Industrial Complex, a permanent war machine, a federal tool of abusive power.
The militias of the Second Amendment are meant to protect against federal coercion, popular rebellions, slave revolts, and — no doubt — lunatics who try to mass-murder children…The descendants of those militias that we call the National Guard are meant, in contrast, to recruit ill-informed young people who imagine they’ll be rescuing hurricane victims into endless occupations of oil-rich lands far from our shores.
To comply with the Second Amendment we must end federal control over the National Guard, regulate such state militias and police forces well, regulate their weapons well, and deny such weapons to all others and for any other use.
The Second Amendment has been made to mean something very different from what was originally intended or what any sane person writing a Constitution would intend today. This means that we must either reinterpret it, re-write it, or both.” (http://interestingblogger.wordpress.com/2012/12/22/the-wait-just-a-goddam-second-amendment/). I will end with a link to my piece about guns: http://beyondbarricade.wordpress.com/2013/02/21/letter-to-the-editor-a-counterpoint-on-guns/.
Thanks for your comments. The one thing I need to clarify is something you said near the end, “The militias of the Second Amendment are meant to protect against federal coercion…” I have to disagree since there has always been sedition and treason laws that prevented uprisings or moves to overthrow the government. Shay’s Rebellion was put down swiftly and decidedly, with strong support from FFs such as Washington.
I didn’t say those words near the end, that was David Swanson. He was trying to say I think that militias were meant to give states powers to protect from federal government encroachment. I think. As for Shay’s Rebellion, that is a misnomer as Daniel Shay didn’t lead the rebellion but rather the farmers did collectively. They succeeded in kicking the British out in 1774 of Massachusetts without firing a shot and in 1786 they felt the U.S. govt. was basically acting like Britain so they revolted. I personally think that those were rebelling had a good cause and the FFs who I call the “traditional founders” defeated the “people’s founders” like those in the 1786 Regulators Movement [what its called in
Revolutionary Founders: Rebels, Radicals, and Reformers in the Making of the Nation: http://www.rayraphael.com/Revolutionary_Founders.htm%5D