Fighting for Our Freedom

M

Menos

New member
Fighting for our rights !

In this modern day war of words and lawsuits, with the Constitutionally enumerated , God given Rights being under attack from multiple quarters I ponder the question; Why aren't the good guys using the best possible defense... a strong offense?

Is it because of a lack of high quality Constitutional Lawyers, or a lack of supporting documentation and or precedent? Is it due to the absence of meaningful tools to strike back at the heart of these ne'er-do-well socialist statist fascists, tools that will have an actual impact on their resolve or their ability to recruit any support to their cause?

None of the aforementioned possible shortcomings is true, so I ask why aren't our pro gun, pro Constitution friends doing one of the simplest things that can be done to stop all of this un-lawful activity? ....

Oh? Unlawful you say? How is that?.... Well let me tell you and you ask your favorite pro gun , pro Constitution friends why this is not being done.

There is a FEDERAL LAW; US Code Title 18, Chapter 13, Section 241 " CONSPIRACIES AGAINST RIGHTS" "If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured - They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death."

Now lets see ... The Second Amendment is a Right, as well as the the Right to Life, and necessarily the means to protect that life as an Unalienable Right under the 9th Amendment... and the fed goons and the HCI , and the Media , and certain City and County District Attorneys are attempting to prevent , and actually hindering , as well as threatening , by means of un-Constitutional laws and regulations limiting and prohibiting the excercise of this right or fearing unlawful arrest and incarceration ( which would constitute kidnapping under the referenced clause of the T18 Statute ) ; It would seem that they are in clear violation of this FEDERAL STATUTE and should be charged in Federal Court accordingly.

Where's the uproar over the trampling of our civil rights? Those extremely high priority Rights that were spoken of in the very document that our Forefathers used to tell the world that they would stand for no more of this activity ... THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE !

Let us each ask someone that we know who is a part of the pro gun, pro Constitution leadership, why this law is not being used against those who are trodding upon our Constitutional Rights ?


------------------
What part of "INFRINGED" don't they understand?
 
I been saying this for a long time. I'm with you , I don;t understand why there aren;t a thousand court cases filed every year fighting this garbage. Why the heck do I send $ to NRA and GOA for anyway? Geez.
 
Ditto.

In the ~6 years I've been actively concerned about gun rights, the best thing I've seen happen is the ruling that local LEOs are not required to do background checks. Wa friggin hoo.

LAWSUITS. NOW. Only problem is most of us don't know where to start.
 
One of the first orders of business in a case brought under US Code Title 18, Chapter 13, Section 241 would be to establish the right allegedly violated is in fact a right to the satisfaction of the various courts that might hear arguments. Even though all of us know the individual right to keep and bear arms exists, the trouble is convincing others (the courts) of that, so this still comes down to a definitive decision on the meaning of the 2nd amendment by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Of course a case brought under said code might end up in the Supreme Court, and there would be the definative ruling we've been looking for.

------------------
“The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals. ... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.” -Alexander Addison, 1789


[This message has been edited by deanf (edited November 22, 1999).]
 
Yes, I agree that it it a tough thing to know how to approach this. Most any of us who came to court would soon be broke and out of work and in front of the IRS for an audit I am sure...but Any person who is stopped in one of those random traffic road blocks for DL and Insurance checks should use it as the basis of his defense. They must show probable cause , and then they have to prove why you don't have the Right of self defense when the court has procalimed that the LEO community has no responsibility to protect you. It is a pretty fundamental precept in law that if you have a right , you must therefore have the right to have the means with which to enjoy that right , with 'enjoy' being used in the sense of 'to be able to utlize the right or priviledge'. If you have a "Right to Life" then you must logically have the Right to have the means to keep and protect that Life. This is something that we need to keep in front of the pro Constitution media...it might actually become "their" bright idea...lol
 
Menos...

I suspect the reason that no one has filed a lawsuit against the conspirers is simply a question about payment for legal services rendered. Most sharp pro-Constitution attorneys can make well into six figures in private practice. Taking a pro-bono case in this arena is a crap shoot whereby the final outcome is completely unpredictable, as well as when and how one would be paid for their time.

The best use of NRA dollars would be for them to file such a suit, using their legislative wing. But I suspect that would be as far fetched as assuming the NRA will one day take a "no-compromise" approach to gun legislation.

Most of my attorney friends would love to nail the Federal (or State) government on such charges, but it all comes down to putting bread and butter on the table. How does one get a corrupted government into court with so many corrupted politicians, judges, and lawyers in the game. This is the very reason why so many lawsuits are settled out of court. But what's to settle here? Do you think the government is going to publically announce that they're sorry for violating the Constitution and our Rights, and make everything right again?

I suspect that those that conspire to erode our rights have allot of time on their hands. That their progress is a generational one. One that can be implemented by indoctrinating school children, propagandizing the masses over years, and gradually tightening the noose around our perverbial necks, without the sheeple even making a peep.
 
I remember reading somewhere that the downfall of this country will be based on the governemtns ability to bribe us or fight us with our own money. "Democracy in America" I believe. The problem with such a suit is th e $$$ involved in fighting it. The gov has unlimited funds to fight and delay and fight... We on the other hand do not. The gov also has one other great advantage over the regular joe; we have to depend on government employees ruling against themselves. Highly unlikely to happen.
 
The reason that the NRA, GOA or whoever do not bring lots of cases is because they are forever looking for the "right case."

The right to self defense you spoke about is long established in Common Law. Sir William Blackstone, an English jurist from about 250+ years ago wrote in his "Blackstone Commentaries" that the right of self defense was "an absolute right." You often hear socialists saying that "no right is absolute!!" Think again. And, to a liberal, try saying that a woman two-months pregnant has not "right to choose."

Blackstone said that given the absolute right to self defense, the right to keep and bear arms was an "auxilary" to that right. Ya gotta have the means, ya know?

As to the LEOs having no responsibility to protect you, such has been case law in America since South v Maryland (1856), as well as modern times Riss v City of New York (1969) and the gruesome Warren v District of Columbia (1981). The court has ruled consistantly that "police [and other government officials] have no responsibility to protect individuals but only society as a whole [enforce the law]. Nature abhors a vacuum. If government has no obligation in an area (and they don't) who does? Why, the individual, complete with his auxilliary right to keep and bear arms.

I suggest you go to the www.jpfo.org web site and order "Dial 911 and Die" to read more of these cases.

Rick

------------------
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American." Tench Coxe 2/20/1788
 
PR,Taz & RD... yes ,Tis true that the fedgov are somwhat entrenched ( LOL ) but the fed judges are lifers and have little to gain unless they personally aspire to political office. Yes the fedgov will use our tax money against us, but we are right and we must start somewhere: this being a rather obvious violation , easily demonstrable, and readily arguable from a Constitutional and logical position. The trick is to get either a good young lawyer wanting to make a big name for himself or one of of the older committed pro- Constitution lawyers who feels a debt to our country for his good fortune.... and I have read the 911 stuff...
I'll call 911 to have them collect the refuse...

------------------
What part of "INFRINGED" don't they understand?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top