Is the Right to Armed Self-Defense Obsolete?

MaverickNH

NES Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
8,221
Likes
7,804
Location
SoNH
Feedback: 8 / 0 / 0

“... the police, often on direct orders from mayor and public safety chiefs, often stood by while looting and rioting gripped American cities. This abdication of basic policing responsibilities rather weakens the argument that people should just rely on police, as do calls to defund the police.

... the major national media outlets barely reported the violence and why local governments didn't stop it.

... much of the violence was planned and coordinated by organized leftist (and overwhelmingly white) anarchists, who used the the cause of racial justice and police reform to promote their own violent agenda.”


He’s saying that yes, the right to self-defense is being obsoleted by left-leaning government, just when we need it most: “...if law enforcement is unwilling or unable to preserve basic law and order, it’s both inevitable that citizens will try to fill the breach, and desirable that law-abiding individuals should be given the means to do so.”

Details at The Right to Armed Self-Defense in the Light of Law Enforcement Abdication by David E Bernstein :: SSRN
 

“... the police, often on direct orders from mayor and public safety chiefs, often stood by while looting and rioting gripped American cities. This abdication of basic policing responsibilities rather weakens the argument that people should just rely on police, as do calls to defund the police.

... the major national media outlets barely reported the violence and why local governments didn't stop it.

... much of the violence was planned and coordinated by organized leftist (and overwhelmingly white) anarchists, who used the the cause of racial justice and police reform to promote their own violent agenda.”


He’s saying that yes, the right to self-defense is being obsoleted by left-leaning government, just when we need it most: “...if law enforcement is unwilling or unable to preserve basic law and order, it’s both inevitable that citizens will try to fill the breach, and desirable that law-abiding individuals should be given the means to do so.”

Details at The Right to Armed Self-Defense in the Light of Law Enforcement Abdication by David E Bernstein :: SSRN
Law enforcement does not have the legal responsibility to provide protection for anyone or anything - life or property. In particular, there are clear examples unelected law enforcement is leveraged by weak leadership as their agents of tyranny. This has been clearly demonstrated even through the propaganda.

For your legal consideration as well:

Castle Rock v. Gonzalez

Warren v. District of Columbia


DeShaney v. Winnebago County

To highlight the tyranny of activist judges and the importance of originalist judges consider the dissent on Heller and how this conflicts with rulings above:

"And the subsequent development of modern urban police departments, by diminishing the need to keep loaded guns nearby in case of intruders, would have moved any such right even further away from the heart of the amendment’s more basic protective ends."

District of Columbia v. Heller
 
Last edited:
The situation, is that Antifa promotes “moderate violence” - just enough to provoke an overreaction from police or a drawback. As most large cities have sympathetic Democratic governments, they chose drawback, and Antifa “wins” by gaining a foothold. That’s their strategy - never provoke an overwhelming law enforcement response. They don’t advocate killing people, just beating people and destroying property, which in many States does not justify shooting them.

They provide the liberal media with video showing excessive police response, which provokes a pullback, either from liberal government or police themselves. Either way, Antifa wins.

I’m always drawn back to A Nation of Cowards where we are forced to endure assault, abuse, theft, robbery by government who will not prevent such offenses but will punish us for doing so. A few heads on pikes by the village gate always seemed to do the trick...
 
What are you going to do about it, send in your vote?

Rest assured that .gov's right to self defense works great, not so much for peasants and there is very little we can do about it at this point.
 
Maybe some republican should introduce a bill that ordering police to stand down during violent riots or looting should be construed as conspiring and a felony charge.
 
Maybe some republican should introduce a bill that ordering police to stand down during violent riots or looting should be construed as conspiring and a felony charge.
first they would have to introduce a law that says laws apply to important people. That would put them in danger as well.
 
Someone asking or stating that my right to armed self defense is obsolete will never stop me from being armed and defending myself, my family, my friends or any citizen on the street being criminally attacked.

That's just the way it's going to be until the dirt is shoveled over me in my grave.......take it or leave.....you're not going to change it.
 
The more I dig into how Antifa works the more I see that Antifa uses RKBA against law enforcement. They bust a few windows, break down a few doors, and opportunistic low-lifes (local residents) loot and burn. If anyone gets shot, it’s not Antifa. They have stood back with video rolling to document police or citizens defending property with force. Lethal force, they hope, so they can foment greater angst and swell the ranks of those who support them and oppose police.

This guy went undercover to document Antifa tactics.


And Antifa calls his reporting a myth.

 
Maybe some republican should introduce a bill that ordering police to stand down during violent riots or looting should be construed as conspiring and a felony charge.
You would need to so that on every State. I dont think you can do it at the Federal level.

Good luck with that.

You also create all sorts of problems. Now there is something minor going on, the PoPo goes all in and the problem blows up.
 
The real professionals are well-versed in addressing that risk.
Use+of+Farce-page-001.jpg
P. S. I've stayed in Chicago twice, but I've never gotten the T-Shirt.
 
It may go out of style with the MSM, but it's not obsolete. I think most intelligent people over 40 hear "we don't need no vigilantes around here" and can clearly hear the absolute BS in it. Under 40, you need to have lived a bit to realize that the police are NOT right behind your garage 24/7 to protect you. Stuff like Antifa and BLM just illustrates this so well.
 
Police right behind your garage?
Justine Damond was not available for comment.
In most cases, no, unless they happened to be nearby on an unrelated matter. The rich will have armed security sworn in as special police officers or sheriff's deputies. I heard stories of this mysterious computer genius and businessman named Doctor Wang. He had a huge estate in Lincoln, MA. His entire security staff were fully sworn special police officers.
 
My point is: Every dumb ass on TV says, "let the police handle it. Guns are dangerous and should be in no one's homes. Wait for the police. They're only several to dozens of minutes away." It was MUCH stronger 20 years ago than it is today. I recall watching some dolt on some syndicated home improvement show talk about door locks. He HAD to go into the "and what you DON'T want to do is purchase a firearm. Police recommend you get a good lock and wait for them." Yeah right, buddy. LOL
 
Back
Top Bottom