Guns & the Bill of Rights

[bluesqueak]

> Our safeguards come in the form of a free and very independent 
> press who have regular opportunities to quiz our leader (how many 
> press conferences has Shrub given in his presidency? And I mean 
> actual press conferences not just statements to the press - I'll 
give you a clue, it's less than 10), a
> judiciary that isn't elected (thank goodness, justice and 
> popularity are after all not always compatible) and is having its 
> last tie to the executive severed and a strong parliament. We also 
have history on our side - the last
> time a ruler tried to indefinitely suspend Parliament and set up a
> dictatorship we executed him.
>  
> K

And we have our greatest safeguard - the sheer bloody-mindedness of 
our people. 

Don't confuse a gun with freedom. We have a long, long tradition of 
telling the government to get stuffed [as Kathryn points out, dating 
back to 1649 when we explained to King Charles I that he ruled by 
our consent, not by divine right. And just to prove that you no 
longer have our consent, we will now proceed to chop your royal head 
off. ;-)]

And that tradition has continued on its merry way down to the 
1990's, when demonstations and riots (without a gun in sight) showed 
the then government that they *cannot* enforce an unpopular law. 
(The Poll Tax Riots). Or when the people of Tatton in Cheshire 
showed that no party machine could force them to re-elect a sitting 
MP they believed corrupt. (They elected a slightly bewildered 
reporter called Martin Bell, who was standing on an anti-corruption 
platform - the first Independent MP in Parliament for over 50 years)

Hitler could have been elected here, I think. But he would have 
elected himself into a civil war, because 'the government is always 
right' is just not in our tradition. 'Resist the government when 
it's wrong' *is* in our tradition. 

You said, Steve:
"But if the tide turns against you, what measure of assurance do you 
have (Bill of Rights), what resources are at your disposal to bring 
a straying government under control? "

Us. Just us. 

That's all it takes. Because a Bill of Rights is not worth the paper 
it is written on if the people who are supposed to govern by it 
don't believe in it. 'Bills of Rights' also depend on 'us'. The 
people. Deciding that they are not going to let 'the government' get 
away with it. Deciding that in the last resort they will *make* the 
government abide by its laws.

Who holds the guns and the tanks is important. But you are 
forgetting that guns can be obtained, and petrol bombs made, and 
things can go bang in the night if the people are determined. 

As Kathryn said, we have history on our side. History has taught us 
that we are our own constitution. The Bill of Rights is us.

Pip!Squeak