HOW LONG DOES THE USA HAVE?

This is the most interesting thing I've read in a long time. The sad thing about it, you can see it coming.
I have always heard about this democracy countdown.

It is interesting to see it in print.
God help us, not that we deserve it.
How Long Do We Have?
About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new cons titution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:


'A democracy y is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'
'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.'
'From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.'
'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years'
'During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance ;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage'

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St . Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:

Number of States won by:
Gore: 19
Bush: 29

Square miles of land won by:
Gore: 580,000
Bush: 2,427,000

Population of counties won by:
Gore: 127 million
Bush: 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Gore: 13.2
Bush: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: 'In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country.
Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...' Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the 'complacency and apathy' phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's popu lation already having reached the 'governmental dependency' phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.


PS: Most of us grew up with the saying 'history always repeats itself.' The American people really need to think seriously about WHO they will be voting for.



A lot of food for thought here.

Cheers, Vince

Vince, thanks for the reminder and the sentiments expressed are spot on. That said, Australia and Canada has allowed some rather unsettling laws to enter their books relative to firearm ownership. How did you let this happen? Now they are trying to ban knives in England!

Vince, do you see any mood of the public to revoke anti gun laws in OZ? Dimitri, how about Canada?

Harder in Canada cause we have no "right" in any way shape or form to own firearms, hell to own anything for that matter. Gun laws are only the tip of the ice burg.

The problem is our "great" Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the constitution) doesn't include property rights. Really easy to figure out why (was written by a communist sympathizer). So the government can legally take all the firearms by banning them any way they wish. And they have done it in small amounts to owners of specific firearms.

Firearm laws are at a stand still (thanks to our Conservative Party who have not passed new laws to please the anti-gun crowed, removed transfer fees, created Amnesty's for gun owners and have not flipped flopped on the issue). If the Liberals win, more restrictions are in the books using non-constitutional Order-In-Councils (like a American Executive Order, can only be used to create more legislation not revoke/modify old legislation) and without a gun friendly majority they cannot be undone (needs the Parliaments approval to edit or remove laws). The Conservatives win, they are to remove the registration system for non-restricted firearms (needs a majority to pass the house), a step in the right direction.

The public is slowly going from fence sitting to agreeing that new gun laws will do nothing, and are more to favor tougher sentences now. Also a real good step for the gun owners in the country. This can be seen by the defeat in the last Federal election when they pushed a handgun ban all the time, and in the end it was there undoing.

In Canada gun owners have ONE party to vote for, none of the others are pro-gun no matter how they spin it.

On the 14th Vote Conservative.

Dimitri

Australia is similar to Canada in some ways...only we don't have anything that even remotely resembles your Constitution. What Rights we have, we have at the whim of the Government.

Do I see a Roll Back of the existing firearms laws....no....it would take a majority of very strong pro firearms politicians being elected, and even then I can't see them changing things as they stand now because even if 50% of the politicians elected are pro gun, that leaves the other 50% who are not...and they would not want to do anything to "upset" their voters.

We work on a Two Party Preferred system. This is the Australian Labor Party (ALP) and the Coalition (Liberal & National Parties). Preferences play a bit part in our political system. At the end of the day, the most popular candidate can still loose under this system.

Two Party Preferred System

Cheers, Vince

Thanks for the reply Vince. Now, here is another question for you if you don't mind. If handgun restrictions were lifted, what handgun(s) would you want to buy and in what priority?

Handloader wrote:

Thanks for the reply Vince. Now, here is another question for you if you don't mind. If handgun restrictions were lifted, what handgun(s) would you want to buy and in what priority?

Hm, now that is a difficult one. I would have to work out priorities based on the needs at the time.

For a personal defence carry handgun I'd want either a 40 cal or a quality .45, tuned for reliability. As a backup for home defence I think a 2" .357 Mag revolver...either a Colt Python or a S&W 586 or 686...tuned of course.

For range/target shooting, and as a hunting backup, I would want a S&W 6" Model 586 or 686 in .357 Mag or a Ruger Blackhawk in 41 Mag or 44 Mag. I reckon I could fit a Ruger MkII .22 in there as well.

For hunting I would want a TC Contender...probably in 30.30 (had one and loved it) and of course my "backup" above.

I know that these would not necessarily be everyone's choice, but from the experience I have with handguns I believe that they are more than adequate for the roles indicated.

Assuming there were no restrictions I would probably prioritise my acquisitions in the order of:

1. Personal defence

2. Hunting

3. Range/Target shooting

Of course I would revise/acquire different handguns according to the existing needs and availability of new/different handguns coming onto the market.

Ammunition for the handguns would be a mix of factory offerings and handloads depending on the use at the time.

Cheers, Vince