Liberty, by Peter Mancus
- Is the analysis set forth in No. 75 above persuasive?
- Do you realize that the vast majority of the Judiciary, of the Legislatures, of the Executives, of Academia, and of the Media reject this analysis?
- How do you feel about this?
- How do you feel about you, and your fellow citizens, collectively, over decades, paying trillions upon trillions of hard earned dollars in taxes to self imposed Authoritarian Elites who insist upon passing more victim disarmament laws? To people who believe their hide is worthy of protection but yours is not, that you are expendable but they are not? To people who fear Freedom? To Freedom Haters? To Liberty Thieves? To Useful Idiots for Tyrant Wanabees?
- Do you realize that the U.S. Supreme Court, after being in existence for well over two hundred years, has still not yet ruled that the right contended for in No. 75 is fundamental nor binding on the states? How does that make you feel? Think!
- Do you realize that all victim disarmament laws are a perversion of the Law of Self-Defense and of the July 4th Declaration, of the Constitution, of the Bill of Rights, and of the 14th Amendment?
- Do you now realize how Liberty's Enemies have used language as a powerful tool to try to interpret away your rights? To increase the power of Statists? To decrease the rights of Citizens?
- Do you now realize that the supreme law of the land is still the Constitution and not what Liberty's Enemies say the law is?
- What have you done to preserve Liberty? To restore the Constitutional Rule of Law?
- What are you willing to do?
- Do you realize that Liberty is not a perpetual motion concept? Do you realize that it is the burden of citizens to sustain Liberty?
- To keep civil authority from falling into error? To help civil authority get back on the Constitutional track? To say "No!" to civil authority when it tries to exercise illegitimate authority? And, when necessary, to take up arms against civil authority to restore Liberty and the Constitutional Rule of Law?
- If civil authority will not reform itself, what will you do: wear your chains or take up arms?
- Are you worthy of Liberty?
77. Does the July 4th Declaration's assertion of an inalienable right to Life and Liberty imply a corollary to those rights, namely, the right to carry a firearm in a public place for lawful self-defense to enforce those rights? If not, of what value or utility is a non-enforceable right? Can something even be a right if it is non-enforceable? If no one has a duty to take it seriously? If there is immunity for transgressions against the alleged right?
78. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that females have a fundamental right to an abortion — to kill their fetus.
79. Since females have a fundamental right to kill their fetus, should not law-abiding citizens have the fundamental right, and choice, to carry a firearm in a public place for lawful self-defense, to defend, to preserve, human life? Why?
80. How can killing a fetus be a fundamental right but using a gun in a public place for lawful self-defense not be a fundamental right?
81. Beginning with these dubious U.S. Supreme Court decisions, Americans, unknowingly and unwillingly, without a shot being fired, involuntarily traded, in effect, King George III's arbitrary, despotic rule for the arbitrary, despotic rule of the U.S. Supreme Court.
82. The terms government immunity, sovereign immunity, judicial immunity, executive immunity, and legislative immunity do not exist in the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court invented these terms. The terms Right to Petition, Bill of Rights, the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, Shall not be Infringed, however, do appear in the Constitution.
83. The core essence of sovereignty is this: one is sovereign only when there is no higher political or legal authority.
84. The popular myth, repeat, myth, is this: "government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
85. That government perished — as long ago as the 1830's. Since then, we have been living in a land of increasing Constitutional mirrors and disingenuous sleight of hand — intellectual dishonesty that would measure 9.0 on the Richter scale for earthquakes.
86. How can the people be sovereign when the Judiciary has declared immunities for civil authority and a monopoly on determining what is Constitutional? Reformulated, how can the people be sovereign when, as a result of the Doctrine of Governmental Immunities and the Doctrine of Judicial Review, the people have lost control of civil authority and are unable to hold it accountable without resorting to arms?
87. How can civil authority logically and legitimately claim "sovereign immunity" for itself when it is created by the Constitution, the Constitution says that it is the "supreme law of the land," that the people are the ultimate and final source of all legal power, and the Constitution says nothing about "sovereign immunity"?
88. When civil authority granted itself immunity from wrong doing, and when the U.S. Supreme Court declared that it alone has the sole right to determine what is Constitutional, it did all of the following:
- it made a mockery of the First Amendment's alleged guarantee of a Right to Petition for Redress of Meritorious Grievances;
- it broke the Constitution's chains;
- it set itself up above and against the Constitution . . . and the people;
- it set civil authority free to run amok while it weighed down citizens with its yoke;
- it forfeited its legitimate claim to authority to rule;
- it made a bold, naked grab for raw, unfettered power;
- it took a giant step toward despotic rule; and
- citizens lost the ability to control civil authority by being able to hold it accountable in a court of law.
89. It is logically impossible to reconcile Government Immunity with the Right to Petition. No genius can reconcile those concepts. Even God cannot reconcile those concepts. Immunity stiff arms citizens, breaks the Constitution's chains, undermines the Bill of Rights' glue and reduces Right to Petition to a sham.
90. Immunity cuts civil authority, and its agents, too much slack and grants them too much legal cover to hide behind when they do unconstitutional, stupid, counterproductive, wasteful, expensive, alarming things against citizens. Immunity is civil authority's way of subsidizing, protecting, promoting and encouraging statecraft malpractice. Hence, the Judiciary is not part of the solution. It is a major part of the problem.
91. What are the odds that the Judiciary will admit that it made mistakes when it invented these "jump the tracks" doctrines? My guess is no better than yours, but my guess is virtually "Nil!", until the public understands how they have been fleeced, how the value of U.S. citizenship has been reduced and make a major show of force that demands that their rights be restored, or else.
92. Power is the ability to obtain a desired result. Power, in nature, and in politics, abhors a vacuum. Power will continue to expand until stopped by an equal or stronger power that makes it contract.
93. The odds of the Judiciary, and Civil Authority, admitting that they goofed, that they have been running Constitutional red lights, and that they have been overstepping Constitutional bright lines, are, in my judgment, so small that the odds are greater that the Earth will spin off its axis first.
94. Our Constitutionally limited democratic republic is moving through the following periods in its life cycle: Formation; Golden; Complacency; Rot; Blatant Oppression; Agitation for Reform; Rebellion; Civil War; Rebirth of Freedom; New Formation; Golden—and the cycle repeats itself.
95. We are now deep into the following stages: Rot; Blatant Oppression; Agitation for Reform.