62

Of course there is.

63

Not in the sense of contract law.

It is not possible for me to be “in breach” of the Constitution.

64

Of course it is. And for the government as well.

1 Like
65

It is undeniably possible for the government to be in breach of the Constitution. Depending on perspective, you could argue it happens every moment of every day.

But there is no possible scenario in which an individual can breach the Constitution.

66

Of course there is. Insurrection.

Or how about Sovereign Citizens? Civil disobedience? Burning, Looting, Mayhem directed at the government?

67

All of those are crimes, but not breaches of the Constitution.

68

Oh counselor, but they are. They are a failure to recognize the authority of the government we allowed to form per the contract.

What makes them crimes?

69

No, they’re not. We as citizens are under no obligation to recognize the authority of the government.

Laws.

70

:joy: If I didn’t know better, you’d be worrying me a bit now.

71

The Constitution is law.

72

It’s in the phrasing.

73

Sure. But it only defines one “crime”.

74

You sound like a Sovereign Citizen.

75

No, they’re all clowns.

But it is interesting that that’s what you read into it.

76

I’m just reading, not reading into.

You are destroying the basis for all kinds of laws, public accomodation for example.

77

No, I’m not. I don’t make laws, or enforce them. I live within them, or around them. I understand that they will continue to exist, no matter what I do, say or think.

That is the difference between “Sovereign Citizens” and myself.

78

Of course you are.

I don’t think there is a difference there at all. From what I have read, they believe laws exist and will continue to.

79

Love the rebellion. Embrace it.

80

To me, most of the problems we face are the result of incompetent politicians who do not live up to the contract.

@Jezcoe stated in Funny Political Pictures II

I do not see the rich as the problem. I see the politicians as the problem. They craft the laws. I’ll concede that many engage in corruption in taking bribes to pass laws that benefit the rich. But It all comes back to if the politicians weren’t corrupt, than the rich wouldn’t be able to bribe them.

When I was a kid in the 70s and 80s, I had a lot of confidence in the ability of our political leaders. I dont have that same confidence today. I see idiots that are able to give a good speech or tell people what they want to hear so they get elected. But actually in office, they dont have a clue much less the first idea about how to solve any of our issues. It seems like all that is done by our politicians is to foment divisiveness.

81

The rich is what killed NYC. They are the ones who have pushed developments that are not for where actual people live, but for the wealthy or foreign investment money.

And before this becomes a thing about Democrats v Republican we can look back at the past three mayors and see how we got to where we are today.

Guiliani, Bloomberg and DiBlasio.

Only one of those guys ran as a progressive and I voted for DiBlasio hoping that he would slow down what was becoming apparent, that the city wasn’t investing in having middle class people any more but he put his foot on the gas pedal because he was in their pocket also.

Remember the really stupid fight over getting rid of the horses in Central Park? That was never the safety of the horses… it was about where the stables are located… prime undeveloped area on the west side of Manhattan.

Almost every single large scale development in the City has been for the benefit of the rich and in a lot of cases as a huge global money laundering operation.

And… getting tax breaks to do all of this while the city’s infrastructure is literally falling apart.

This was done to benefit the rich. They are the one’s who ruined NYC.