The difference between our founding fathers and current government

**FromMyColdDeadHands** · January 24th, 2008, 01:41 AM

So I just had an epiphany...I was reading a post on another thread that regarded the legal age to own/possess firearms in PA and this was on of the posts....

"Originally Posted by icp4life162005
I don;t see where it gets at for ages 18 to 21. I am half asleep but i don't see it.
Huh?

If your looking for a law that says "You can do this or that at 18" ... Your not going to find it

The law says what you can not do. In this case it outlines possession of a firearm being prohibited for those whom are under 18. Therefor over 18 is OK.

The Reg on 21 and over for purchase/transfer of a handgun through a FFL is a fed rule that I don't have the cite to from where I am at."

Maybe that is the difference, our founding fathers wrote a constitution that RESTRICTED what the Federal Govt. may NOT do, it PROTECTED what citizens CAN do. Our current Govt. has for some time now believed that its function is to tell citizens what they are allowed to do. While continually loosening the restrictions on themselves...I know I have known this for some time now but the post made me think about it in a different light.

Your thoughts??

**sluggie24** · January 24th, 2008, 07:59 AM

Ummmmmmm.............buy as much ammo as you can and get ready?

The federal government has gotten way out of hand. Yet another reason to vote for Ron Paul.........unless you like option 1 above better.......

**Philadelphia** · January 24th, 2008, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHands

So I just had an epiphany...I was reading a post on another thread that regarded the legal age to own/possess firearms in PA and this was on of the posts....

"Originally Posted by icp4life162005
I don;t see where it gets at for ages 18 to 21. I am half asleep but i don't see it.
Huh?

If your looking for a law that says "You can do this or that at 18" ... Your not going to find it

The law says what you can not do. In this case it outlines possession of a firearm being prohibited for those whom are under 18. Therefor over 18 is OK.

The Reg on 21 and over for purchase/transfer of a handgun through a FFL is a fed rule that I don't have the cite to from where I am at."

Maybe that is the difference, our founding fathers wrote a constitution that RESTRICTED what the Federal Govt. may NOT do, it PROTECTED what citizens CAN do. Our current Govt. has for some time now believed that its function is to tell citizens what they are allowed to do. While continually loosening the restrictions on themselves...I know I have known this for some time now but the post made me think about it in a different light.

Your thoughts??

America is a relatively young nation and in general terms I see two potential outcomes for its long term future:

1. the tension between personal freedom and big gov't swings back and forth like a pendulum -- when gov't grows so big that enough people get sick of it, we start electing people who promise to shrink it and do so. I think Reagan sort of fell into this category as a small example. People haven't gotten sick enough of big gov't yet, but in some respects look at how even the liberals scream about gov't wiretapping and other invasions of liberty and privacy. Something's always brewing to help ensure things don't get completely out of control even if it looks bleak in the short term. At least that's the optomistic view.

2. the nation evolves to become like Europe where the cognoscenti and "sophisticates" govern us poor slobs who obviously aren't smart enough to not be governed and controlled by gov't in every aspect of our lives. I don't really see this happening because aristocratic versus democratic selection of our leaders isn't our foundation -- but you never know.

**markheck1** · January 24th, 2008, 09:34 AM

Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHands

So I just had an epiphany...I was reading a post on another thread that regarded the legal age to own/possess firearms in PA and this was on of the posts....

"Originally Posted by icp4life162005
I don;t see where it gets at for ages 18 to 21. I am half asleep but i don't see it.
Huh?

If your looking for a law that says "You can do this or that at 18" ... Your not going to find it

The law says what you can not do. In this case it outlines possession of a firearm being prohibited for those whom are under 18. Therefor over 18 is OK.

The Reg on 21 and over for purchase/transfer of a handgun through a FFL is a fed rule that I don't have the cite to from where I am at."

Maybe that is the difference, our founding fathers wrote a constitution that RESTRICTED what the Federal Govt. may NOT do, it PROTECTED what citizens CAN do. Our current Govt. has for some time now believed that its function is to tell citizens what they are allowed to do. While continually loosening the restrictions on themselves...I know I have known this for some time now but the post made me think about it in a different light.

Your thoughts??

Yes! that is it exactly....I believe this all started to go the wrong way when the government realized they could make money off of the people.....Now it's a huge money making scheme, that is in a downward spiral, that I fear we will never break,

**Captain Tuttle** · January 24th, 2008, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHands

Maybe that is the difference, our founding fathers wrote a constitution that RESTRICTED what the Federal Govt. may NOT do, it PROTECTED what citizens CAN do.

That sir, is one of the most profound observations on this point I have heard.

It encapsulates exactly the difference between the Founding Father's intent vs. the state of the government today.