|
 Jack Hays Friends, first off I would like to apologize for my previous state. After a good dunking in a horse trough I am of a more than sober enough mind to deal with the affairs of state. First off, while I generally support the bill of rights proposed by Fremont, I must object to the seizure of property required by it. Slavery is a vital institution to white civilization, and its abolishment guarantees its collapse. We cannot abandon the institutions that have made our people so great. Along with striking the "Right to Emancipation," might I propose an addition to this bill: quote:Right to Settlement - Until such a point that no such land is available, all Anglo settlers who immigrate to California and pledge Allegiance to our Republic will be granted 100 acres to work and immediate citizenship. This act will guarantee a steady flow of good people to populate and produce from our vast empty tracts of land, bringing wealth and prosperity to us all. In regards to the map, I support Fremont's map, although I believe it is also important we at some point chart out the territories as well. An election by popular vote is fine, as we have seen in our homeland the electoral college was not prevented the rise of poor leaders. 2 - popular vote
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:05 |
|
|
Takanago posted:
 Charles Lucien Bonaparte Ornithologist Your reasoning is persuasive, I will join in calling for 2: popular vote. This will have the added benefit of denying the duplicitous Mormons one more tool in their arsenal of depravity, namely finagling the state borders to secure greater support for their candidates. We need only shine the light of Reason upon their crimes and persuade the people to reject them, rather than battle them in the dark warrens of their design.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:13
|
|
|
 John C. Frémont Jack, I have immense respect for your service and your bravery. That said, your attitude towards slavery is nothing short of terrible and has no place in this land. Now in regards to your Right to Settlement, I am very fond of the idea. Free Soil is a valuable tool both in accelerating the expansion and economic growth of our nation, but making it so that our frontier is settled by small, family-owned farms instead of large plantations. Family farms need not rely on the ills of slaves or tenant workers, and thus are a much stronger foundation to build a country upon. Free Soil has been a topic that I have had great interest in, and while I wasn't planning on going as far as Texas has by putting it in our constitution, I do appreciate the idea. May I make a suggestion, though? A small one, but an important one. How about revise it like so: quote:Right to Settlement - Until such a point that no such land is available, all
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:
 Samuel Brannan You have nothing but my sympathies and condolences, sir, for you must live a terrifying life, seeing boogeymen around every corner. The state lines we endorse are those drawn up by the good Fremont, and if you believe him to be a Mormon, I'm sure he'll be able to set you straight himself. However even you are invited to the Grand Baptism and Celebration Feast on the Sidon, that you may see the Grand Mormon Conspiracy is one of good fellowship and brotherhood. As for government handouts of land - while the distribution of Homesteads is one thing, the automatic citizenship provision seems unnecessary. Either my plan passes, in which case these settlers will be eligible for citizenship in 3 years like everyone else, or the madness of Open Citizenship does in which case it is moot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
Jack Hays It is one thing to allow Chinamen and Mexicans the right to vote, but to start handing them free land is just absurd. Instead of a free nation we will fall under the spell of oriental despotism or Santa Anna. No, I cannot support this revision, you push too far Mr. Fremont.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
Charles Lucien Bonaparte Ornithologist I believe Citizen Frémont to be innocent of the knowledge of the terrible ambitions borne in the hearts of reactionary religious institutions, and I will forgive him for unknowingly aiding the seat of darkness in our fair Republic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
John C. Frémont Mr. Bonaparte, please do not imply that my cartography is somehow aiding in some vile conspiracy. How would you feel if I so publicly declared that your scientific observations on avian creatures were some way responsible for the threat of slavery spreading into this land? Why, it would be grossly inappropriate of me to tarnish the reputation of your field of expertise. And it is quite inappropriate for you to do so to mine. The shape and size of the southern inland valley state is completely necessary. The only possible reasonable alternative would be to perhaps make an even bigger state that also encompasses the northern half of the valley, but that would likely push it past a reasonable size in regards to communications and infrastructure.  If you look at this colorized topographical map, you will see that mountains surround the central valley very strongly and almost completely. The entire watershed is dependent upon the bay of Yerba Buena, and so if any inland state is to have reasonable access it must thus connect to it. That was my rationale for expanding the borders of the Moroni-containing state all the way to the southern end of the valley. Or to put it another way, it is like how the migration pattern of birds depends upon the dictation of the seasons and the winds. While it may be technically possible for birds to go against the wind and into the cold, it would in no way be productive. And that is how I feel about your map.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:53
|
|
|
Commodore Stockton "If I might adjust Mr. Young's suggestion about the right to form a militia, might I amend it to the following? Right to maintain a militia: "States shall have a right to form and maintain a well regulated militia, under the command of the governor of the state, for the defense of the state against insurrection, rebellion, or invasion, but no person with religious objection to bearing arms shall be compelled to serve." A state militia should be sufficient. Localities should not be allowed to form their own militias not under the control of the state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
Charles Lucien Bonaparte Ornithologist I thank you for the informative topographic map, Citizen Frémont, which demonstrates that the supposedly impenetrable mountains bordering the coast are in fact much less foreboding than those which pioneers crossed to get to California in the first place, and are in fact riddled with passes and rivers which would aid further in navigating the mildly hilly terrain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:43
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:Commodore Stockton Brigham Young  Sadly sir, we must disagree with this clause on the strongest terms. You would forget that my people were driven by Missouri by a tyrannical governor who used the state militia to nearly exterminate us. We would oppose this amendment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 07:02
|
|
|
 José Castro Epicurius posted:Commodore Stockton Commodore, while I believe your opinion to be a good will if all men were angels, but alas, this is not the case. A militia ran by a state which could be very disparate and different from the smaller entities within could well result in tyranny of the majority over small populations. New migrants of negroes from United States could easily be harassed by an Anglo militia with no one to defend their rights. Your system places too much faith in too few men. I must emphatically disagree.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 07:30
|
|
|
OOC: Please don't edit votes, but rather do as others have done with good example, through conversation just represent that your character has changed his or her (hahaha) mind. I try to keep the tallies up to date even if the vote isn't finished so if things get edited, I don't necessarily go back and reread what people said earlier. Thanks! Also! please make sure if you have a vote you'd like recognized, make a note of it in the post with the appropriate letter/number/whatever, in bold if you can.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
 Wang Long I believe the second option for electing a president is the most fairest of all plans. Nonetheless, it will require us to set a day as a national holiday so that we can allow everyone to vote. Option 2 - Direct Democracy
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 07:45
|
|
|
 Pee Qa Chu One man. One Vote. Mr. Chu votes Option 2 Edited: Wrong number
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 07:48
|
|
|
The votes are tallied, and soon the decisions have been made. It seems that the Brannan Plan for citizenship is to be adopted by California, while the President will be chosen via Direct Democracy with one man, one vote. Mr. Fremont's map is given near-universal acclaim, and it seems that California shall begin as six separate states. The Constitution of this new American Republic is taking shape, though for the most part seems mostly cobbled together from pieces of the old one, with a more democratic character by far. Yet as the American constitution is dissected here among the motley crew of the Niantic, the freedoms that have been outlined in the Bill of Rights are seen as somewhat lacking, or not entirely perfectly formed. There are other freedoms to be had, and perhaps those which existed in the past now need adjustment. A list of Rights is to be created, and each will be voted upon in its turn. A secretary is asked to present himself as willing to collect this list of rights, along with a short description as to what they would protect, and the name of the author. Once the list is fully compiled, each attendee will be given a list and asked to vote yes or no to each right, individually. Thus California shall have its own bill of rights! (Click for Big!)  In addition, with the boundaries drawn for California's new six states, questions come up as to who is actually a citizen of each state? It is determined that the Senate shall be elected from two members of each state's delegation here among the representatives at the Niantic, and the Senate shall oversee the functions of the House until proper apportioning of the territory can be done such as to create house seats, to be done within one year's time. OOC: Thus, there are two things you guys should focus on for the next day or two. First, someone should compile a list of potential 'rights' as detailed above. Second, figure out who belongs to which state, figure out two people from your state to be Senators, and give your state a name. In the case that two people from a state disagree as to who should be the senator, whoever can pool the most influence from within the state shall be declared the winner. Also mind you, once you choose a state, you cannot move to another state, though you can later move to the territories if you wish (and thus potentially set up a new state).
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
John Sutter I'll be living in the north eastern state in the city of Neueva Helvetica.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
Samuel Brannan I am most gratified that the convention has seen fit to adopt my plan, and remain convinced in it's wisdom and ultimate success. While my heart yearns for the Valley, my head demands otherwise. I shall remain in San Francisco, and put my name forward in consideration for the Senate. I offer the following platform - free trade, free enterprise, and mutual prosperity for all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:34
|
|
|
John C. Frémont Now that I am free from the confines of jail, and the status as military governor I held before that, I will be settling near the city of Yerba Buena. I've found a nice spot to the southeast of the city that I've found quite charming. Takanago fucked around with this message at 08:42 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
Voting spreadsheet: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uUfMbtIgPOuz16AM0tICGZzUlGew00WlQP_NduTn-ZA List so far of the proposed rights, and their author: Right to Freedom of Speech, Press and Assembly: Every citizen shall be at liberty to speak, write, or publish his opinions on any subject. No law shall ever be passed to curtail the liberty of speech or of the press or the ability to peaceably assemble. Frémont Right to Freedom of Religion No preference shall be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship over another, and every person shall be permitted to worship according to the dictates of his or her own conscience. Frémont Right To Bear Arms: Every citizen shall have the right to bear arms in defence of themselves, their community, and their Republic. Frémont Right to Emancipation: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist anywhere within the Republic of California. Frémont Right to a Fair Trial & Due Process: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury. No criminal punishment shall be handed down to any citizen without going through due process, and all citizens shall not be subject to "double jeopoardy" by being prosecuted for a crime for which they have been acquitted. Frémont Right to Freedom From Unjust Searches and Seizures The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. Searches and seizures will only be authorized by the courts after going through due process and establishing probable cause and justification for the specific act. Frémont Right to Freedom From Monopolies: Being against the genius of a free government, monopolized control of any industry or market shall not be established or allowed by law. Frémont Right to Freedom From Dynasties: No public position in the Republic of California shall pass by means of hereditary succession. Neither shall any appointed public position go to the Appointer's relatives. Frémont Right to maintain local and state militias: States and localities shall have the right to a well-regulated militia. The federal government may not have a monopoly on the possession or manufacture of arms, nor shall it have the ability to outlaw citizen militias. Young Right to maintain a militia: "States shall have a right to form and maintain a well regulated militia, under the command of the governor of the state, for the defense of the state against insurrection, rebellion, or invasion, but no person with religious objection to bearing arms shall be compelled to serve." Stockton Right to Work: Every citizen will be entitled to employment at a national workshop or other place of work, furnished by their state Bonaparte Right to Settlement: Until such a point that no such land is available, all Anglo settlers who immigrate to California and pledge Allegiance to our Republic will be granted 100 acres to work and immediate citizenship. Hays Right to Settlement: Until such a point that no such land is available, all settlers who immigrate to California and pledge Allegiance to our Republic will be granted 100 acres to work and immediate citizenship. Frémont Right to Property: Except as a statutory punishment for a crime for which that person has been convicted, California shall not dispossess a person of his property without just compensation. Stockton Right to Freedom of Settlement: All citizens and law-abiding visitors possess the liberty to travel, reside in, and work in any part of California as they please, within the limits of respect for the liberty and rights of others, and may leave California and return at any time. The federal government of California, nor the states, nor the localities and municipalities, nor any private organization or entity may infringe upon this freedom, except through the due process of the law Dong Right to Freedom of Education: All citizens have the right to education, directed to the full development of citizens of California (e.g., English) and to the strengthening of respect for virtue and public morality. It shall promote understanding, tolerance, and fraternity among all inhabitants of California, for the maintenance of great peace under heaven. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Parents may choose the kind of education to be provided to their children Dong Right to Freedom from Depravity: All citizens and law-abiding visitors have the right to live under a government dedicated to the promulgation of virtue. The government shall commit itself to regular checks and inspections to maintain an incorruptible nature, punishing evildoers and those who abuse the power of the state. The government shall not infringe upon those who seek to spread wisdom that enhance the moral character of the state Dong Enjoy fucked around with this message at 08:04 on Dec 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:37
|
|
|
DEMOGRAPHICS These are the demographics as of the last counts (never a census) which took place. There are other people living in the hinterlands, but these are the populations of main settlements, the only things which have been counted. Southern California San Diego - 500 (Californios) Pueblo de los Angeles - 1,600 (Californios) Santa Barbara - 500 (Californios) Northern California Monterey - 1,050 (Californios) Yerba Buena (San Francisco) - 15,000 (90% Anglos, 7% Californios, 3% Chinese) Nueva Helvetia (Sacramento) - 3,000 (90% Anglos, 10% Indians) Sonoma - 500 (Californios) Moroni - 6,000 (Anglos) New Mexico Santa Fe - 4,650 (Mexicans) Albuquerque - 1,500 (Mexicans) Las Vegas - 500 (Mexicans) Socorro - 500 (Mexicans) Sonora Tucson - 300 (Mexicans) Texas El Paso - 500 (Mexicans) Colorado Fort Pueblo - 200 soldiers (United States)
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:43
|
|
|
Brigham Young I of course am taking up residence in the fine city of Moroni, capital of the soon to be named state of Nimrod in the Valley of Nimrod. I would prefer to be Governor, so I may set up the state to be one of just fairness to all, but also virtue to those of the faith.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
Jack Hays I have settled in the city of Sonoma. I submit myself as a nominee for our first Senate, provisional or otherwise. I also propose the state be named New Austin. In regards to the bill of rights, I vote aye for all except for the bastardization of my Right to Settlement by Mr. Fremont and the silly Right to Emancipation. Sheng-Ji Yang fucked around with this message at 09:26 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 09:21
|
|
|
Charles Lucien Bonaparte Ornithologist I shall be relocating to, and standing as Senator of, Nueva Helvetia
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 09:22
|
|
|
OOC: Here's a potential territorial map I drew up. Tak promised to make it prettier later, but let's see if it has some broad acceptance so we can avoid doing a bunch more votes on this stuff: Assume the badly drawn lines follow rivers or are straight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 09:26
|
|
|
John C. Frémont I am officially announcing my intention to run for the office of Senator in the state that represents the city of Yerba Buena. In due time, I may also run for a certain other position of national importance... but that is for another time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 09:29
|
|
|
José Castro I intend to remain in my home of Monterey, from which I intend to run for Governor of the state I propose be named Edén. The name draws on the old legends from explorers long past. Not to mention the breathtaking beauty to be found all throughout its borders. As I was a governor prior the war, I intend to resume that position and ensure fairness for all people residing in this state. HarmB fucked around with this message at 10:02 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
 William Walker I intend to apply for citizenship in Northern California and intend to own property in San Francisco, I have no aspirations to serve the public interest from an office.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 13:28
|
|
|
 Elliot Harding As a miner in Downieville, I already live in the great state of Nueva Helvetia. Normally I'd be setting forward the great an' tolerant Major William Downie as our choice for senator, but he took a great fall while prospecting late last month and is no longer with us. I'm honored to stand for election in his memory.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
The Homestead Amendments, as written, seem a roundabout way of declaring open citizenship, and thus I will have to oppose them. Should they be considered in a future legislative session, that would be different. Furthermore, as written, these amendments would exclude Californians already living here! No, no, no. Further, a "Right" to work? Madness! With what shall we fund this national system of make-workshops? Such a thing would require massive tax hikes, taking time and money from actually economically productive endeavors. A strong No! sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
Elliot Harding I agree with Mister Brannan - no such thing in this world as a "right" to work. Every man should make his own way; not depend on no government to bail his lazy rump out. Put everyone on a level playing field, I says, and we see who sinks an' who swims.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Samuel Brannan I will furthermore once more argue against the "Right of Freedom from Monopolies." While I agree that the Government has no place in granting Monopoly Charters like the Kings of Europe, I must vociferously oppose the notion that the Government has any right to come in and break up successful companies. This, much like the Homestead Act, seems like something that we should not enshrine into the very foundation of our nation, but may be better served by more limited legislation at a later date.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
JosefStalinator posted:Brigham Young Commodore Stockton What is the point to your militia then, sir? Surely, the point of the militia is for the defense of the land and the people; to supplement the Regular Army and to serve where they can not. Should Mexico invade, or should there be some Indian Uprising, then the people must not rely solely on the Regular Army to protect them. Should there be some disquiet, and the army is too far away to respond in time, then it will be the militia , the people en masse, that will rise up and drive the invader out of the land." "In order to do so, though, this requires leadership and coordination. If all militias are local, though, this would cause great difficulty. Each local militia would act independently, without any ultimate authority to organize them. If two local militias differed on the correct course of action, who would mediate between them? Someone must command, and it is the governor of the state who is best able to organize the militias of the state. Further, the state government would have resources the local governments do not. The militias, if they are to be effective, must be of uniform character and quality, with uniform equipment. If all militias are local, then those towns that are rich will be well equipped and provisioned, and those that are poor will be poorly equipped and provisioned. Surely, you see the danger in that. If they are under state control, then the state can set up standards for training and equipment, and help local militia companies meet those standards, which make us all safer. I am aware of the difficulties your faith found in Missouri, sir, and deplore them, as, I think, does everyone here. But surely this is not Missouri. Your people should fear no danger here. Indeed, no doubt the people in your state shall elect a Mormon governor. Fear not, sir, for you have found yourself a home and place of safety.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Samuel Brannan For the sake of having my views and arguments on the record, I shall lay them forth here at length. Right to Freedom of Speech, Press and Assembly: Every citizen shall be at liberty to speak, write, or publish his opinions on any subject. No law shall ever be passed to curtail the liberty of speech or of the press or the ability to peaceably assemble. An unqualified yes. Basic rights, to be protected against the Government of not just this generation, but all future ones. Right to Freedom of Religion No preference shall be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship over another, and every person shall be permitted to worship according to the dictates of his or her own conscience. Again, an obvious yes. Right To Bear Arms: Every citizen shall have the right to bear arms in defence of themselves, their community, and their Republic. Frémont As above. Right to Emancipation: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist anywhere within the Republic of California. Frémont I am leaning in favor, despite my strong belief in property rights. Labor relations should be based on the exchange of labor for capital, not through bondage and duress. Right to a Fair Trial & Due Process: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury. No criminal punishment shall be handed down to any citizen without going through due process, and all citizens shall not be subject to "double jeopoardy" by being prosecuted for a crime for which they have been acquitted. Unobjectionable. Right to Freedom From Unjust Searches and Seizures The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. Searches and seizures will only be authorized by the courts after going through due process and establishing probable cause and justification for the specific act. Unobjectionable Right to Freedom From Monopolies: Being against the genius of a free government, monopolized control of any industry or market shall not be established or allowed by law. And here we have my first disagreement. If this Right was limited to preventing the Government from establishing unnatural and artificial monopolies, then all well and good. But to ban natural forming ones is an unnecessary imposition on the free market. Should we be enshrining into our foundation the principle that the Government has the right to break up private enterprise as it sees fit? I think not! Right to Freedom From Dynasties: No public position in the Republic of California shall pass by means of hereditary succession. Neither shall any appointed public position go to the Appointer's relatives. Unobjectionable. Right to maintain local and state militias: States and localities shall have the right to a well-regulated militia. The federal government may not have a monopoly on the possession or manufacture of arms, nor shall it have the ability to outlaw citizen militias. The right to form organizations for the defense of self, home, and community should not be abridged. This is especially relevant given our utter lack of any form of law enforcement - for the time being, our frontier communities will have to defend themselves. Right to maintain a militia: "States shall have a right to form and maintain a well regulated militia, under the command of the governor of the state, for the defense of the state against insurrection, rebellion, or invasion, but no person with religious objection to bearing arms shall be compelled to serve." No objections, Right to Work: Every citizen will be entitled to employment at a national workshop or other place of work, furnished by their state A thousand times no! Not only do we not have the Government income to furnish such places, not only is it an insane burden on the natural workings of a Free Economy, but it reeks of the radical ideas even now throwing Europe into chaos. The strongest of nos. Right to Settlement: Until such a point that no such land is available, all Anglo settlers who immigrate to California and pledge Allegiance to our Republic will be granted 100 acres to work and immediate citizenship. While I am sympathetic to the need to attract immigrants, granting immediate citizenship is an end run around my rather sensible plan. Oppose. Let future Homestead Acts be a debate for the Legislature. Right to Settlement: Until such a point that no such land is available, all settlers who immigrate to California and pledge Allegiance to our Republic will be granted 100 acres to work and immediate citizenship. Frémont As above. I welcome debate on any of the above - let us not just mumble our opinions to the Convention Secretary, but debate in the full light of God and Country! sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
John C. Frémont Mr. Brannan has indeed pointed out a loophole in the "Right To Settlement" that I pointed out to him. As such, I would like to revise my version of the idea: quote:Right to Settlement - Until such a point that no such land is available, all As for the other criticisms, I do not believe it is necessary to change the amendment in the ways they suggest. If they want a homesteading grant with more nuance, they are free to vote this strong amendment down and work with me on legislation when the time comes. I am a strong believer in the idea of Free Soil, and so if a homesteading act is not in effect when I take political office it shall be a central part of my agenda. On the matter of the Right to Work, I have thought long about the idea and have the following thoughts. Such a proposal is actually unnecessary in California for two reasons. 1.) If an able-bodied man is unable to find work or labor in his community, he can always take the option of serving in our country's military. He can either stay in for many years and build a career as I have, or serve for a short term and then return to civilian life. In a way, this provides an always-existing source of work available to any man regardless of education or training. 2.) The "Right to Settlement" also does the same thing, in an even stronger way. Giving a man land gives them more than just work, but it makes them a responsible and free landholder who is not indentured to anyone else. You could consider it a "Right to Work Land". Free Soil doesn't just provide sustenance, but also builds strong, free communities in a strong, free land. It also has the benefit of requiring little overhead cost. Almost all of the work needed to facilitate this is done by the settlers themselves, an ideal scenario. As for militias, I personally believe there is something to be gained by community control of militias, and not just State control. While it is true that during wartime it is necessary to have coordination and a command structure between them, the fundamental duty of a militia is to protect the home and that is a responsibility that falls in the lap of every citizen personally. It is the ultimate self-interest, and as such we should not exercise excessive control over any private militias provided they comply with all state and federal laws.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Takanago posted:
Samuel Brannan I would support the Homestead Act as written should it merely negate the length of residency requirement - the instant citizenship it now grants largely undercuts several key points of our agreed upon path for citizenship. What prevents people from making their claim to get the free citizenship, then not actually settling the land? I will be happy to debate Legislation on the subject further, should we both be so fortunate as to be so entrusted with such office. I think it should go without saying that any formed Militia would ultimately be responsible for complying with the laws of State and Nation - to do otherwise would be to become a criminal enterprise, not a Militia. sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
John C. Frémont For the matter of public record, I shall note my votes on the amendments thus far: Right to Freedom of Speech, Press and Assembly (Frémont) Right to Freedom of Religion (Frémont) Right To Bear Arms (Frémont) Right to Emancipation (Frémont) Right to a Fair Trial & Due Process (Frémont) Right to Freedom From Unjust Searches and Seizures (Frémont) Right to Freedom From Monopolies (Frémont) Right to Freedom From Dynasties (Frémont) Naturally, I vote yes on my first block of amendments. Right to maintain local and state militias (Young) Right to maintain a militia (Stockton) I vote yes on Young's militia amendment, favoring that one over Stockton's. If Young's does not pass, I will vote yes on Stockton's. Right to Work (Bonaparte) I vote No, for reasons I mentioned previously. Right to Settlement (Hays) Right to Settlement (Frémont) I vote no on Hays's proposal, and vote yes for my own. If mine does not pass, I will wait until it is time to pass legislation to tackle the issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Commodore Stockton Why did we just pass provisions laying out the process to citizenship if we then are willing to throw them out with these homestead bills, granting 100 acres and citizenship to anyone who comes to California? This is little more than an attempt to invalidate another provision the majority has voted for. If we wish to offer land to new immigrants, let us do so, but let us not make the laws contradictory!
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:Commodore Stockton Samuel Brannan Hear hear! What say you, Homesteaders? Edit: Commodore Stockton has convinced me - I shall support his version of the Militia Bill over that of Prophet Young. I'm sure he'll understand. sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Elliot Harding I done made my support known for open citizenship, so I reckon you folks understand why I've thrown in for Colonel Frémont's homesteadin' plan. We've got a little less than forty thousand folks in this nation, and we'll be in dire need of more if the Yankees and Mexicans come to claim our gold an' land. I wouldn't let someone ain't a citizen pick up a rifle, would you? Let 'em swear their oaths for now and let that be that - in a few years we'll refine the process. If the gold don't dry up I can guarantee you California will be swellin' with people in that amount of time. We gotta keep 'em somehow, an' offerin' land for them to make their own is a damned fine way of doin' that by my estimatin'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:05 |
|
|
Once again, I have no objections to granting land for homesteading - merely the automatic citizenship, which seems ripe for exploitation. What prevents miscreants and neerdowells from making claims for the free citizenship, then leaving the land fallow and unimproved? No, we have our conditions for citizenship, let us not instantly short circuit them! Edit: To reiterate, I make my solemn vow that should I be elected, I will work in good faith to pass similar legislation to get people in this country and on the land. sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 21:41
|
|