Who should be tried for treason?

Who should be tried for treason?

This is a discussion on Who should be tried for treason? within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Since this was a hot topic in another thread I thought we could isolate the debate. Treason: Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies ...

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 50
Like Tree51Likes

Thread: Who should be tried for treason?

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,883

    Who should be tried for treason?

    Since this was a hot topic in another thread I thought we could isolate the debate.

    Treason:

    Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war
    against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and
    comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason
    and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five
    years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and
    shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

    So who should be tried for treason? Let's use the recent vote in the Senate as an example.

    A resolution was put forth basically saying we will not sign an ATT. Now, that was put forth by a Republican. The vote passed. Now, some folks are crying the 46 who voted against it (which, BTW does not mean they would sign vote for an ATT) should be tried for treason. Why? What enemy are they helping? First of all they did nothing because their vote failed and did not cause aid and comfort to the enemy or did anything other than vote no.

    For those that think that these folks should be tried for treason, look back at all of the votes in the last few decades. What about budget votes for the military? Is a vote to slash the military a budget worthy of a treasonous charge? Why or why not? What about the Patriot Act? How about invading Iraq? Support ofr drones on the battlefield?

    I want to keep this 2A and defense of country ass the focus, but what about Obamacare? Many folks think that is not COnstitutional. Should the Supreme Court and all of the Reps and Senators that voted for be tried for treason? It has th epossibility of economicly hurting our country which makes it fall intot he category of hurting our national security.
    I want to hear both sides, but more so the folks that want to try elected officials for treason by the way they vote.

    Now a hypothetical: Another 9/11 attack happens and it is known that it was done by a specific country (China, N Korea, Iran...you choose). Their is a declaration of war up for a vote (just like after Pearl Harbor). A few elected officials vote NO because they are pacifisct. Should they be tried for treason? What if they were not pascifist and voted no for a number of other reasons. Do you try them for treason? What is the difference between those votes and the votes in the Senate last week?
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8


  2. #2
    VIP Member
    Array ppkheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4,130
    Personally I'm not holding my breath waiting on pending treason charges on anyone, or the ands, if's or but's about the process. Our country is seriously split on just about every issue, the recent UN senate vote pretty closely represents the same proportional split of the country.

    I don't know what level of "treason" some people may be at, however, it does seems to me some folks are not very patriotic these days. I made a point this morning about treason in the other thread and to save retyping I'll add my two cents again on that topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by ppkheat View Post
    I think the "treason horse" has been whipped enough. INAL, and if I were I probably wouldn't know the details about treason. Having said that those 46 who voted the way they did, have the right to vote how they want to, especially if they are representing what their constituents want. If they aren't supporting their constituents then on judgement day......uhhh, I mean on election day they can be voted out. If their constituents are complacent and quiet, then they'll win their seat again, it's really up to the voters.

    Those 46 chose to vote a different postion than I'd prefer, so I might lump 'em all and call them unpatriotic, 2A haters, turncoats, or whatever. That's how it goes in politics.

    Nope, I don't like how those 46 voted at all, it disturbs me quite a bit, but rather than gripe about it here on a internet gun forum, I'll focus where I think it counts more. I have pledged that I'll work hard and actively on whoever I prefer that runs for a political office. While it's extremely important to cast your vote on election day, in today's world that's not quite enough. I feel I need to do more to help the candidate I support.

    GET INVOLVED ON ELECTING GOOD PEOPLE.
    Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME. Our success in this will be proportional to how hard we work to make it happen.

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,438
    I wouldn't think that voting either way on anything actually put to a vote in this country could be called treason, otherwise how could it even be voted on.
    Now, some folks are crying the 46 who voted against it (which, BTW does not mean they would sign vote for an ATT) should be tried for treason.
    Tried and hung for treason? Probably not. Tarred and feathered and run out of town? Maybe.

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,883
    Quote Originally Posted by ppkheat View Post
    Personally I'm not holding my breath waiting on pending treason charges on anyone, or the ands, if's or but's about the process. Our country is seriously split on just about every issue, the recent UN senate vote pretty closely represents the same proportional split of the country.

    I don't know what level of "treason" some people may be at, however, it does seems to me some folks are not very patriotic these days. I made a point this morning about treason in the other thread and to save retyping I'll add my two cents again on that topic.
    That is why I started this thread LOL...you were the inspiration. OT: there is not level of treason...it is treason or not treason. As far as being patriotic...that has zero to do with being treasoness. I think that is the hang up with many folks. Some folks thought it was the right thing to do and the patriotic thing to do by protesting the Vietnam War (and Iraq and Afghanistan). Some folks look at that as being treasonous. (I am not talking about Jane Fonda here).

    Someone can spit on the American flag an use it for toilet paper and speak out about how bad the US is and that is unpatriotic....not treasoness.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  5. #5
    VIP Member
    Array ctr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley in Virginia
    Posts
    2,351
    I do not believe treason is the issue at hand. Rather, I would suggest lack of values and character are the core issues at the forefront of the breaking down of our country. So few elected leaders and citizens seem to understand the values this country were founded on. Few understand the value of conservative values and the danger of liberal values. Fewer still have the character to put aside their personal benefits and sacrifice for the greater good of fixing what is wrong with America today.

    The republic will be lost without a shot having been fired. It is coming apart from within because the citizens are not of good character and do not hold values consistent with the founding fathers.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Array sigs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    539
    I know you are specifically referring to the issue at hand. But when I think of treason and who should be (or should have been) charged two names always come to mind. Jane Fonda and John Kerry.
    Ksgunner and Richard58 like this.

  7. #7
    Member Array Latch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Ascension Parish
    Posts
    15
    Treason will be if odummy uses a foreign military force on American soil to control U.S. citizens! Treason is if odummy writes an Executive Order trying to override "ANY PART OF THE CONSTITUTION" which will not happen regardless. Casting a vote for one's belief that it's for the common good is not treason but, the right to exercise free speech be it for or against an issue.

    Someone can spit on the American flag an use it for toilet paper and speak out about how bad the US is and that is unpatriotic....not treasoness." This is a statement of free speech also. And for the record, should I ever see anyone abusing "OLE GLORY" then I'll exercise my right as well and put my foot in their four point of contact!!! And, pay my $25.00 fine for public disturbance!!
    Jeanlouise, 84160 and GoPackman like this.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Array rmilchman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    790
    Who should be tried of treason? My opinion.
    1 - anyone who authorizes the use of the military against our citizens or within our borders with the intent to kill. (ex: authorizing a drone strike in our country (treason), authorizing the military to provide support during a crises like a hurricane (not treason).

    2 - anyone who attempts to circumvent our constitution (ex: a UN treaty)
    Richard58, 84160, ccw9mm and 1 others like this.
    Glock Armorer

  9. #9
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,883
    Quote Originally Posted by sigs View Post
    I know you are specifically referring to the issue at hand. But when I think of treason and who should be (or should have been) charged two names always come to mind. Jane Fonda and John Kerry.
    No, no specific issue in mind though the current dialogue in another thread was the impetus for the creation of this thread. Anyhoo, Jane Fonda:yes....Kerry? Why? As far as I know he only spoke out about the Vietnam War after he left and did use many accusations about atrocities committed by US troops which did occur.

    Was he an oppurtunist? Certainly. Treassoness? I am not so sure.

    I think the Founding Fathers would be very careful on who is tried for treason and what thier litmus test would be..after all...look how they got their start LOL. Now, as far as current folks...PFC Maning does come to mind. That is about a slam dunk. Whether he thought his actions were noble, they still hurt the US diplomaticly, which he knew would happen.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  10. #10
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,883
    Quote Originally Posted by ctr View Post
    I do not believe treason is the issue at hand. Rather, I would suggest lack of values and character are the core issues at the forefront of the breaking down of our country. So few elected leaders and citizens seem to understand the values this country were founded on. Few understand the value of conservative values and the danger of liberal values. Fewer still have the character to put aside their personal benefits and sacrifice for the greater good of fixing what is wrong with America today.

    The republic will be lost without a shot having been fired. It is coming apart from within because the citizens are not of good character and do not hold values consistent with the founding fathers.
    I am sure those arguments and words were levied against the folks that wanted to end slavery and womens suffarege. I am sure they thought that liberalism was getting out of hand. I am not totally disagreeing with you. I just don't like when folks toss around liberal and conservative like they should be enemies. To some conservatives LGBT folks should be put back in the closet.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  11. #11
    VIP Member
    Array WHEC724's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    6,536
    Even with the benefit of you providing the definition of treason, I don't feel that I'm qualified to properly interpret it. It still requires greater research, case law studies, etc.. This is what attorneys do for a living, and I sure hope that some are out there watching this game very closely.

    Which leaves me with my personal opinion...



    Whec says:

    Anyone who swears to uphold and defend the constitution and then proceeds to do everything within their power to circumvent it, is vile, treasonous, verminous scum.

    Anyone who conspires against the integrity of our national security (which includes economic sabotage), is putrid, detestable, treasonous feces.

    I could elaborate, but you can see where I'm going here.
    __________________________________
    'Clinging to my guns and religion

  12. #12
    Member Array nathanjns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    479
    Jane Fonda's actions were treasonous. John Kerry is just the most prominent, dishonorable, sold out, political hack in existence ( since Ted Kennedy is now gone ). The folks in Congress are often excruciatingly wrong ( by my standards ) but I don't consider voting ( when it is your job to do so ) as treason. The POTUS falls somewhere between Kerry and Congress, but can do more harm than a hundred Fondas. JMO.

  13. #13
    VIP Member
    Array Jeanlouise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    2,169
    To me, treason is when someone actively acts to undermine our country, especially in collaboration with a foreign country.
    When something is brought up for a vote, voting one way or another isn't treason. Unless what's being voted on is clearly treasonous; such as, "Should the Constitution of the United States be overturned and rewritten?"

    Jane Fonda committed treason because she actively undermined our country during a war. She willingly bolstered the enemy cause by posing for photographs and propaganda.

    John Kerry is guilty of being a jackass and a prancing pretty boy. If that was treason, most of Congress would be indicted.

    Another act of treason was by Bradley Manning for stealing top secret computer files.

    Treason is one of those slippery concepts. It's hard to define but we know it when we see it.
    It may be that your sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.

    http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown...eaves%20office

  14. #14
    VIP Member Array Richard58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Charlotte area of North Carolina
    Posts
    2,110
    Quote Originally Posted by rmilchman View Post
    Who should be tried of treason? My opinion.
    1 - anyone who authorizes the use of the military against our citizens or within our borders with the intent to kill. (ex: authorizing a drone strike in our country (treason), authorizing the military to provide support during a crises like a hurricane (not treason).

    2 - anyone who attempts to circumvent our constitution (ex: a UN treaty)
    Number two is what I was talking abt on another thread. The 46 voted for it....to let other countries control our laws...no way
    The police are not there to protect you from crime, they are there to arrest the guy after the crime has been committed, assuming they find him. It is your responsibility to protect yourself and your family.

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array LimaCharlie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    3,447
    Quote Originally Posted by sigs View Post
    I know you are specifically referring to the issue at hand. But when I think of treason and who should be (or should have been) charged two names always come to mind. Jane Fonda and John Kerry.
    John Kerry went to Paris and met with the North Vietnamese during the war while he was still a reserve Navy Officer. He should still be in prison for treason. Jane Fonda is guilty of being a stupid airhead.
    I carry a gun, because a Cop is too heavy.

    U.S. Army, Retired
    NRA Patron Life Member.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

46 senators should be tried for treason
,
can a us senator be tried for treason?
,
do not hire jane fonda for anything sent her back to n.v
,

john kerry should be tried for treason because

,

sc constitutional carry

,

senators should be tried for treason

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors