The way I see it, while some things in this country aren't fair, it's really not right to say that we're living under tyranny. When we start living in a country where the government forces us to have certain religious beliefs, THEN we can say we're living under tyranny.
Cry me a river. Taxes are the price we all pay for civilization.
Also, the colonists were protesting taxation without representation, not taxes in general.
Everyone's been told that in order to drive a car, they need what's called a Driver's License - a privilege granted by the government. What if I were to tell you that's not necessarily true. Back when cars were first invented, no license was required to operate or drive what is now referred to (by the government) as motor vehicles.
First of all, requiring a license to drive a car is not unconstitutional. You do not have a constitutional right to drive a car. Second, a driver's license exists to prove you are responsible enough to drive and have passed certain tests. Considering how dangerous a car accident can be, that's a minor price to pay for keeping the morons off the road.
The Constitution explicitly grants Congress the Power to coin our nation's money and regulate the value thereof, which is gold and silver.
No, congress has the power to print money period. It is not required to be some magic precious metal. And if we did go back to the gold standard, it wouldn't solve our monetary issues, it would just cause very rapid inflation.
Before 1776, the British tried to confiscate all the colonists' guns. This was one of the primary reasons we separated from them.
No it wasn't. Not even the Declaration of Independence mentions that.
Now it seems to be happening again with all these "gun-control" "laws", not allowing ex-felons to bear arms, etc., all of which I believe violates the Second Amendment.
Are you seriously suggesting that people who were convicted of a serious crime should be free to own weapons that make mass killings easy? Also, gun control does not prevent you from owning a gun, therefore it is not unconstitutional.
If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns...and I'm talking about the REAL OUTLAWS (murderers, robbers, etc.)
Oh, that's cute. Now tell me, if we made guns more difficult to acquire and kept assault rifles out of the public hands, where are those outlaws going to get them? As it stands, criminals who would normally be barred from getting guns can obtain them legally with shocking ease, either through a gun show or by stalling the background checks.
TODAY'S CORRUPT GOVERNMENT got to its worst when they started requiring human beings to have birth certificates sometime in the 1930s.
But of course! How could we not suspect that an attempt to provide someone with an indisputable form of identity is really a convoluted conspiracy...oh wait. Tell me, do you also believe in chemtrails?