A lie repeated a thousand times…
US Constitution, Article 3, Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
We covered this before. CSGV loves to change the meaning of things to suit their purposes. I found this rather clear explanation of the Treason Clause and its application or rather, when it should not be applied.
The treason clause is a product of the awareness of the Framers of the ”numerous and dangerous excrescences” which had disfigured the English law of treason and was therefore intended to put it beyond the power of Congress to ”extend the crime and punishment of treason.” 1283 The debate in the Convention, remarks in the ratifying conventions, and contemporaneous public comment make clear that a restrictive concept of the crime was imposed and that ordinary partisan divisions within political society were not to be escalated by the stronger into capital charges of treason, as so often had happened in England.
Treason: Definition and Limitations.
And it does not bade well when even one of their followers points out the obvious:
The sad part is that Gun Control Advocates thing it is not Tyranny unless there is a coup de etat led by some just-made general with a bandoliers of ammo across the chest. They fail to see the insidious nature of a soft tyranny that slowly erodes on your rights till you wake up one morning with all of them gone. It will be then when they will decide to do something about it and it would be too late because just the thought of doing something is “lawfully” categorized as the treason they supported on us.
Never forget what CSGV truly thinks should be done about the citizens of this country if they politically disagree with the Government.
Get your EBR before you get a free ride on the cattle train going East.
Of course, under the definition of “treason” posted, there are a lot of very public anti-gunner figures who could be tried for treason. Hanoi Jane, John Kerry, Obummer himself….
….Hillary Clinton…Eric Holder…..(list continues)
Excellent work, Miguel! I’ll be the first to admit, I own assault weapons because they’re the most effective weapon against those criminals who would steal my most valued possession – my liberty. I’ve been making the point all along, that since there is no legitimate reason to ban assault weapons, and the communists pushing for it are fully aware there’s no legitimate reason, their dogged persistence indicates they do indeed have an illegitimate reason. A ban on assault weapons, especially as encompassing as the one they’ve most recently dreamed up covering nearly all weapons with any modicum of efficiency against government arms, is specifically for the purpose of eliminating the ability of the People to resist them. A quiet coup, an attempt to wrest power away from the People. A government which can’t trust it’s own people with arms is clearly not above board, and up to no good. I will not accept another unnecessary and useless ban for the stated reasons. They day they ban them is the day we have the duty to use them, in my opinion.
Ladd certainly likes putting up citations that disprove what he’s rambling on about. But of course the majority of his fellow cult members don’t need anything like ‘evidence’ or ‘facts’ to believe their worldview.
I can’t seem to get on their insurrectionist list. Must try harder.
The people rambling about “treason and insurrectionists” are the same ones who said “DISSENT IS PATRIOTIC” back when Dubya was president.