‘Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons’ Rebuttal (VIDEO)
Tuesday, February 12, 2013 18:50
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.
Below is the original statement that’s pretty intensely weird:
The post ‘Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons’ Rebuttal (VIDEO) appeared first on Guns.com.
2013-02-12 18:46:20
Source:
Constitutional duties of care and protection “by the police” only exist as to certain individuals, such as incarcerated prisoners, involuntarily committed mental patients and others restrained against their will and therefore unable to protect themselves.
Neither a public entity or a public employee “police officer” [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals.
In other words this means the only people the police are duty-bound to protect are criminals in custody, and other persons in custody for such things as mental disorders. YOU have no recourse if the police fail to respond or fail to protect you from injury!
Your protecting is left up to you!
Constitutional rights may not be infringed simply because the majority of the people choose that they be.
Westbrook v. Mihaly, 2 C3d 756
Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation
which would abrogate them.
U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, 380 U.S. 436 (1966)
There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional
rights.
Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 946
The president cannot alter or modify the Constitution!
in Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), to wit:
Congress … cannot by legislation alter the Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be lawfully exercised.
Brookfield Construction Co. v. Stewart, 284 F.Supp 94: “An officer who acts in violation of the Constitution ceases to represent the government.”
“The State cannot diminish rights of the people.” Hertado v. California, 110 U.S. 516
“Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void.”
Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60.
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.”
Bonnett v. Vallier, 116 N.W. 885, 136 Wis. 193 (1908)
“…those things which are considered as inalienable rights which all citizens possess cannot be licensed since those acts are not held to be a privilege.”
City of Chicago v. Collins, 51 N.E. 907, 910
The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself), where the defendant does not cause the problem, and the plaintiff is assumed guilty if plaintiff knowingly allowed or caused the harm to happen, or was negligent in preventing that harm when plaintiff should have and could have prevented it.
If we are to follow the letter of the law, (as they are sworn to do), this places officials who involve themselves in unlawful acts in an unfavorable legal situation. For it is a felony and federal crime to violate or deprive citizens of their constitutionally protected rights. Our system of law dictates that there are only two ways to legally remove a right belonging to the people. These are (1) by lawfully amending the constitution, or (2) by a person knowingly waiving a particular right.
Wow, that cop’s statement was, crazy-stupid or stupid-crazy, one or the other, All I know is I was feeling confused and a little queasy when he stopped talking.
Sir, were you not aware of the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights when you accepted your job? Did you not understand the duties of your job, when you accepted it?
Do you comprehend the meaning of the phrase, ‘…shall not be infringed’?
Moving along, if someone is threatening me or aggressively attempting to harm me with, umm, lets say, a GUN, what would you recommend I utilize as an adequate, equally powerful and effective form of defense? I’m asking, what is likely to get my butt out of that type of circumstance?
A plasma rifle in the 30 – 40 watt range?
An extremely difficult to obtain Romulan Anti-Proton Molecular Phase Disruptor?
A blow-gun?
A sling and smooth medium sized stone, as did David, of Goliath and Biblical fame?
My excessive charm and scathing wit?
Ex-cal-i-bur!?!? (syllabilized for dramatic and theatric effect)
A Purple Nurple? (no trademark or copyright infringement intended)
A big, fat, SPLIFF?
I’m stumped…I just utterly FAIL in my repeated attempts to view the GUN as simply an offensive weapon of attack, that my not reasonably or logically be used in the SAME EXACT MANNER, as a tool of defensive. Is THAT your distinction, Sir? If used for offense, a GUN is a weapon, but used in defense, a GUN is a tool? Oh, I get it now, you are a tool, and the rest of the imbeciles on that stage with you…Keystone Kop…