A Vote for Fix NICS is a Vote to Kill Concealed Carry Reciprocity [More]Assuming your rep is not a safe seat Democrat, are you doing anything in the next minute?
Tuesday, March 13, 2018
‘Take the Guns First’ Bill May be Stuck to Must-Pass Legislation
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
[continuing]
When we start asserting our NATURAL rights and insist on them being respected both in and out of court, our "problem" with all these legislative restrictions on our rights to self protection, using whatever means we are comfortable and competent with, will disappear. That's because the police and governments will eventually have to admit they've been applying those statutes, etc., to the wrong class.
It's about us realizing we have erroneously ASSUMED we were commercial entities, just because we thought we were "persons". As Larry Pratt explained so simply in one of the several posts about this "Fix NICS" and the "Social Security gun ban" bills, it's about actually READING the codes. Further, it's about reading and comprehending what the LEGAL definitions of the words used in statutes are. Sometimes you literally have to sit down with a law dictionary and go through the code or statute word by word to get the gist of what's being said. But my point, which solves most of our misunderstanding about the legal system, is this: We are not corporate fictions - and that's the ONLY thing a legislature can regulate. They CANNOT regulate men and women. They know it, so they had to trick us into thinking that we are "persons" and therefore subject to their (commercial) codes.
We're NOT. We are "men" and "women", UNdefined in statutes, and subject ONLY to natural law. The ONLY government juridical system that exercises any authority over us is the Common Law system. This other system that attorneys practice and maintain a monopoly over is admiralty/maritime/commerce. The right to "assistance of Counsel", protected by the 6th Amendment, meant just that - Counsel. It does not say, nor did it mean "representation by an attorney". But that's what the corporate courts want us to THINK it means. Attorneys (members of the English Bar association), were supposed to represent only those who were before a COMMERCIAL court, not a common law court. And they were prohibited from holding government positions by the original 13th amendment (look that up) for a very good reason, but that's for another discussion.
I keep bringing this up because I'm particularly concerned as one who may, merely by capricious legislative inclusion, be defined a "prohibited person". That's simply because I was originally misdiagnosed and put on SSI and Medicaid, because I had to hand correct many erroneous statements on the form that some idiot functionary at Social Security filled out from a phone interview. I wasn't about to sign anything like that under "penalty of perjury", so they took my crossing out whole sections and rewriting much of the form as evidence of some "mental problem". Thankfully subsequent medical evaluation revealed a minor cardiac condition, and my MD refuted the idea for SS' original, unqualified assessment, saying that I didn't exhibit any of the symptoms. But before reaching the age to qualify for Social Security, I was on SSI-DI and still get a small portion of my retirement from them - which indicates they still have the original misdiagnosis on file, and I've seen my records showing that as the original referring condition. So, now any time Social Security feels like it, or is directed to in compliance with a regulation, they can include me in the NICS database. All this because of their wrong assumptions. My only remedy at this point is to remove myself entirely from their commercial system. In the end, that will be everybody else's remedy, too, if they want to own guns, or, by logical progression, exercise ANY of our natural rights as we go down this road to absolute tyranny.
The government has clearly shown it's intent: to confiscate ALL guns from private hands. They're doing it slowly, step-by-step. We all know what will follow.
-MM
My apologies for being so long-winded, again.
[David, I think it take this first part of my comment - sending it again, just in case, so the rest will make sense]
Ok, trying to keep it on topic, this time (sorry I was so long-winded back on the 2nd commenting on this post: http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2018/03/raising-rifle-buying-age-to-21-would.html q.v.)
The shortest version I can think of is this:
A MAN or WOMAN has natural rights. Those are protected by the Bill of Rights.
A "person" (the things defined in state and federal statutes/administrative codes/regulates, etc.) has only CIVIL rights, and may be granted or denied by the corporate governments.
That's it. "Short explanation" follows. Short, that is, compared to what I COULD say about the topic. That, and to keep these comments within the 4,096 character count . . .
-MM
Yeah so every needs a back up cache of ar15s and ammo unknown to all but to the individual. Getem while they're cheap. Retribution is a bitch.
Post a Comment