Home Loans and Support

When Was the Bill of Rights Written?

Discussion in 'Bill of Rights' started by Moe, Nov 16, 2009.

  1. Moe

    Moe Call 1-800-779-4547 Staff Member Loan Safe Mortgage

    The Bill of Rights, which is actually the first 10 amendments to the US Constitution, was written by James Madison after the Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788 and obviously, before he presented his proposal on June 8, 1789 during the First Congress. The US Congress approved 12 of these amendments on September 25, 1789 but the first two amendments were not ratified.

    The first amendment had dealt with the number and allocation of the US Representatives but it was not approved. The second amendment that restricted the capability of Congress to raise the wages of its members was not approved at that time but it became the 27th amendment two centuries later.

    The Bill of Rights establishes several significant precedents for US citizens, such as the right to religion and free speech, the right to petition the government, and the right to assembly. It also ensures that a citizen will not be tried more than once for the same crime, establishes the rules for what is considered to be due process of law, prohibits self-incrimination, and forbids unreasonable punishment for a crime.

    It also limits the rights of the military to take over civilian homes, and protects people from unreasonable methods of search and seizure. The Bill of Rights also declares that the powers that have not been assigned to the federal government belong to the people and the states and that military and civilian justice should have different codes.

    It is believed that the Bill of Rights owes its presence to the Anti-Federalists who feared that the President could assume powers like those of a king. They refused to accept the Constitution unless it specified the various rights of the people. To appease their opponents, the Federalists agreed to the inclusion of a Bill of Rights after the Constitution had been ratified and during the First Congress.
  2. Yikes_Turbines

    Yikes_Turbines LoanSafe Member

    Greetings Moe! If I haven't mentioned it in earlier posts -- Great Community you've started here! I'm pleased to see the Constitution getting some attention from you. Our Constitution hasn''t received much press for most of my life, including my years being "educated" in public schools. Fortunately for me, my Mom read the Constitution to me often when I was a little boy and told me stories about the men we now call the Founders/Framers. I'm glad she did that, those lessons are why "I get it."

    Today we hear more about the Constitution than at any time I can remember. That is good. Unfortunately I see widespread misunderstanding of the document, it's purpose, and our relationship, as members of American society, with the government. Most people just don't get it. About a year ago I became sufficiently frustrated, and had some spare time, and posted a rant about "Who We Are". It is pasted in below. Link To Original I hope you enjoy it, I hope it makes sense and that people remember who we Americans are.


    Saturday, March 13, 2010 An introduction to "Who We Are"


    In the blog entry titled "Now there are eleven", I prefaced Michael Boldin's piece with some commentary on the purpose, and place, federal and state government hold relative to the people. What I like to call who's who in the zoo (If you think back to your last reading of "Animal Farm", you'll know why I like the "who's who in the zoo" thing).

    It seems that each time I advance the idea that the people are NOT subordinate to the states, and that the states are NOT subordinate to the federal government, the idea is almost universally rejected. Really! Most Americans have subscribed to the "reality" advanced by the media and the public schools - a reality where the federal government is supreme, the states subordinate subdivisions of this supremacy, and the American people are each individually known to, and answerable to, the aforementioned supremacy. That is, of course, complete nonsense.


    The notion that every American is individually known and responsible to the general government is alien to our history and our founding documents. In fact, that notion is exactly opposite the truth. Consider this from the Declaration of Independance:

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness..."


    The colonies declared their independence supported by several "self-evident truths":


    1. that all men are created equal
    2. that they have certain unalienable rights, bestowed upon them by their creator, that include (but are not limited to) life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness
    3. that governments are created and empowered by the people, for the express pupose of securing the rights of the people
    4. that when a government evolves to where it no longer serves to secure the rights of the governed, the people can alter or abolish it
    The above truths should serve as evidence to all that the early Americans sought to throw off a supreme authority to which every individual person answered. They had suffered this form of government, a monarchy, for generations. Why on earth would they have declared independence from one monarchy only to form another?

    The early American's efforts to preserve individual liberty continued as they worked to create and strengthen their union. The Preamble to the Constitution states quite plainly the purpose of the document.

    "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the
    United States of America."



    Of course the preamble is not law, but it does serve to establish why the Constitution was created. The document itself is a description of the structure and workings of the general government and a list of the powers agreed to be ceded to the same by each of the Union states. There is little mention of the rights of the people beyond voting and intellectual property, and there didn't need to be. The rights of the people were well understood by Americans in 1789 and the preamble tells us that they wished to secure liberty not just to themselves, but also to their descendants - and for all time.

    In short order the people and their states feared that the government might easily overstep its bounds. To prevent this, ten amendments to the Constitution were proposed, and later ratified, as the Bill of Rights. These ten amendments granted no new rights to Americans. Instead, they served as series of prohibitions on the federal government to further assure the preservation of liberty. Consider the preamble:

    "THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution..."


    No further disussion of the preamble is needed to establish the purpose
    of the Bill of Rights. Just read the amendments. Eight of the ten tell the government directly what it is that it shall not do (I, II, III, IV, V, VII, VIII, IX). The remaining 2 tell the government how things shall be done (VI, X). That language ought to tell you (and the government) who's in charge here.

    Hopefully this information has made you think about who you are and your role in American society. If you're thinking, "hey, I'm the boss", you're right. Actually, you're the King - and as Michael Badnarik says, [it's] "GoodTo Be King!" Knowing that you're the "King" is a prerequisite to exercising your rights and properly employing the 3 Boxes of Liberty. Thank you, Your Majesty, for your attention. Please come back soon!

    A quick note on the language of liberty. Terms like Constitutional Rights, Civil Rights and First Amendment Rights, have become common in contemporary lexicon, and sneak into everyday conversation. We would be wise to banish these terms from our vocabularies, as our rights are long antecedent the founding of our Union - not granted to us because of our Union. Stay tuned for more on the language of liberty and banished terms.
  3. acesfull

    acesfull LoanSafe Member

    Hi All

    I would enjoy posting with others about the constitution and all our natural rights as a US person.

    I am specifically interest in our natural right to TRAVEL without entering into a contract with some DMV/aka without getting a license to do so. I am not a commericial entity, therefore I feel no license should be necessary. The state and the DMV will argue that driving is a privilege. Yes I belief it is a privilige, if yourdriving for a salary or being compensated, however I believe that TRAVELING is a natural right. No contract should be required.
    I also feel that DMV, SSA and IRS are simply taxing authorities, and no one should be forced to contract with these corrupt agency's.
    I look forward to reading and debating on this topic.
    Thanks to everyone.
    Best regards,
    Nj=9 months
    acesfull
  4. Yikes_Turbines

    Yikes_Turbines LoanSafe Member

    Acesfull - Interesting stuff! Certainly, traveling is a natural right and I have even found a few cases where "motorists" have won in traffic court based on that argument/fact... but it is not easy to prove that you are not a "commercial entity". Your suggestion that the alphabet agencies are nothing more than tax collectors is a great observation. Today I'd say even the police are little more than a revenue stream for there respective jurisdiction. Anyway, you hit on some areas that are truly worthy of discussion and I hope others will join in.

    When I get in from being on the road I'll post up some links to material related to travel, taxation and the SSA. If more Americans knew their history, and understood their rights, life would be even better than it is!
  5. acesfull

    acesfull LoanSafe Member

    Hi All

    Hi Yikes, Thank you for your reply, I hope we get some insightful views and some savvy thinking on subject.

    I feel that most American's are led into believing that statutes are law. Clearly statutes are not laws. Most folks surrender there Natural rights when they enter into a contract to do business with DMV, SSA, IRS.. You basically SIGN your rights away.

    Why would a person that is simply traveling from point A - to point B, an is not being compensated(Is not a commerical driver, IE, chauffeu or taxi driver, truck driver, then why would a person simply traveling for leisure need a license to do just that travel?
    Not to mention that the Goverment cannot force you, a natural person to enter into any contract at all.
    This is a very interesting topic and I hope we get many views, and opinions on our natural rights as people.
    Thanks to everyone in advance.
    NJ-10 months
    acesfull- HWP
  6. acesfull

    acesfull LoanSafe Member

    Hi Yikes

    I hope you are still around LS, you sure sounded like a learned person.

    Getting the police, and local judges and attorney's to admit that are Natural Right to Travel per the Constitution TRUMPS AND STATE STATUTES AND I don't mean Donald Trump.. I mean the constitutional Law is the law of the land.

    A problem that is starting to exist is that folks are willing to sacrifce LIBERTY, FOR SO CALLED SECURITY. And soon we will have neither... SAD

    Folks are you aware that when you have a new born at the hospital, and the hospital insist that you sign this form and that form and you now create a Birth Certifice, A BC of which your unknowning child 's natural rights were signed away.
    Your Child but having a birth certifice now owns him/herself to the Goverment. Your child is now a US citizen and must follow all the statutes and regulations that a US citizen must follow. Good bye freedoms, liberty's and natural rights.
    Your Child just entered into the world of Contracts even thou your child is not of sound legal age to do so, You gave your permission.
    for his/her compliance. Compliance a term you and they will hear thruout there life of being under contract with the US Goverment.

    Now move 16 years ahead. Your young man or lady wants to drive a car. Great, so you head over to the DMV with birth certifice, and social security number in hand, you get a manual and your kid is off to learn about driving or obtaining what the State calls a privilge.
    The child gets a drivers license, again the child is entering into a contract with the State. A contract to allow your child to have the privilge of driving. What we don't realize, what the state will not tell you is that only a person driving on the highways to conduct in business or commerce is subject to have a commericial drivers license. Anyone else is just paying for the privilge to surrender Your Natural God given right to Travel... No license necessary... HOWEVER the kangoroo traffic court and the corrupt department of motor vehicles will never inform you of your Natural Right to Travel, some local jurisdictions will even try to fine or jail you for the slightest breach of your Motor Vehicle Contract License... Remember you signed up for the license, now you need to play and pay by there rules. You gave up you right for a privilge,,,,

    I will discuss some court case in support of my Natural Right to Travel Theory.
    I will also discuss how the SSA is also a corrupt taxing authority, that we create a contract with some times as early as birth.

    Now the good news, I will show folks just how to opt out of those so called contracts and render them null and void along with teaching how and why to sign any Federal or state or goverment agency document with these very simple letters and numbers.
    I suggest you sign all documents with this UCC-1 -308 (without prejudice). This very simple statute/code embodies a person to reserve all his/her rights under the UNIFORM COMMERICAL CODE.
  7. acesfull

    acesfull LoanSafe Member

    Hi All

    Please lets get this thread going. We need to understand our rights if we are going to survive these vile times.
    I will post some caselaw of interest tomorrow, I ask other to chime in with thoughts, complaints, issues, rights violations etc.
    Let's get our concerns heard. Lets continue to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
    Let's talk about our God given rights, lets talk about what is being slowly taken away. OUR HOMES OUR RIGHTS OUR FAMILIES
    Please folks, lets put out thoughts and ideas together along with some good caselaw and findings and lets tell it all.
    Keep our Rights, Keep our Liberties, keep our Homes, lets do it one post at a time.

    Thank you and God Bless.
    Best regards
    NJ-17 Months/HWP
  8. acesfull

    acesfull LoanSafe Member

    YIKES

    I hope an pray all is well in your world.
    We haven't heard from you since 7-21- 11 on this thread.
    I pray all is well.

    Acesfull
  9. Jeffrey L. Shurtliff

    Jeffrey L. Shurtliff LoanSafe Member

    Aces............. How about the roadblocks to screen drivers for illegal activity and intoxicated driving? Presently on my house, as it has already been foreclosed on as you know and the rights I signed away on the DEED OF TRUST are moot. So now I am using as a tool in my fight UNITED STATES CODE TITLE 42, section 1983..........Jeffrey
  10. acesfull

    acesfull LoanSafe Member

    Hi All

    Hi Jeffrey, Personally, I feel road blocks and DUI check points are unconstitutional however I recall reading where the SC ruled they were not UNC.. Reminds one of Nazi Germany.

    The town council in most county's in NJ most rule on them and then vote on having them. They must advise the public(LOCALs Via ads in local paper etc a few days in advance they must also post a sign well in advance of the check point. However this is a joke.
    Here's why, They post the sign Check point ahead, be prepared to be stopped or take the next exit or turn.. When you take the exit or turn.
    Then they have other LEO stop your vehicle, its similiar or should I say. ENTRAPMENT.
    The town's make a ton of money via the court fee's and fines.. Its all about the money.

    In regard to your 1983 tool, its a great defense against the corrupt goverment agency's or agency's that even receive Goverment money.. or operate under color of law..
    I recall mentioning to you some time back a book titled SECTION 1983 litigation by Michael G Collins... A must read.

    Also Jeffrey, now that your dealing with so called goverment entities and there corrupt court, may I suggest you research UCC- 1- 308. Its another powerful tool in regard to RESERVING YOUR NATURAL RIGHTS. Most judges/lawyers will not inform the general public of this powerful UCC code article... Hell they would be out of business if they did, which leds to another point.
    Officers Of the Court and members of the bar associations first loyalty is to the court then the bar association. Not to US/Client as they would have US believe, they walk all over the constitution everday in the so called courts of law.

    Anyway, I am rambling, please research UCC 1-308. Then start to sign every document with this important UCC Article.
    You must reserve your RIGHTS.
    I sign everything in the following way.

    UCC- 1- 308 ( Without Prejudice)
    Acesfull

    Best regards

    Nj-17 Months
    Acesfull/HWP
  11. Jeffrey L. Shurtliff

    Jeffrey L. Shurtliff LoanSafe Member

    Aces............... Thank you for your post as always! I remember your tip on 1983. I just got through with the Presidents office of Wells again as they contacted me to seek possible rescinding the sale. They elected not to. I was not suprised at this as if they did they would not own it anymore as my liens would be priority pursuant to state law. He was very beligerent as far as the lis pendens goes saying so if you want a piece of property you just file a lis pendens? I said yea have you read the state law on it? He said no. He then said they had nothing to do with the property anymore that is was in Freddie Mac's hands. I then just hung up on them and wrote a non judicial communication to them and sent it certified mail. It bars them from taking another or changing their actor status in my case on the lis pendens. I posted the communication on my thread at crossing............Jeffrey

Share This Page

COMPANY LINKS

TESTIMONIALS

"Hello Moe, I just wanted to tell you, your website has saved my life (literally), I stumbled on your site in the middle of losing my home, I was able to network with people going through the same thing as I am. I didn't feel alone anymore, I have tried to give back and counsel those that haven't walked in my shoes yet. We hear so much about what is wrong with America, I just wanted you to know, you are whats "right" with America."

Nina Mitchell
Loansafe & MoeSeo Inc. © 2014 | LoanSafe.org is not a bank, lender, mortgage broker, law firm or affiliated with the US Government. Privacy Policy