Our Civil Liberties

8/14/2019 Our Civil Liberties

1/25

Congress shall make no law respecting anestablishment of religion, or prohibiting the free

exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom ofspeech, or of the press; or the right of the people

peaceably to assemble, and to petition theGovernment for a redress of grievances

-The First Amendment from the Bill ofRights

Our Civil Liberties


2/25

In in this day and age, the violations of our civil liberties have gone into epidemic levels. We knowthis. Ive created this information in order to be reminded on how we should fight for our civilliberties. Our rights makes us become reminded about how we can live our lives to the fullest. Ourfreedoms dont exist from the government or some bureaucrat. They dont even exist from us.They exist from Almighty God being undeniable and unalienable. Life, liberty, and Propertyare related to each other. John Locke wrote in his "Second Treatise of Government" bookthat people want to preserve their property and power should be limited among thegovernment. So, it's easy to decipher that life, liberty, and property were the central, inalienablerights that formed America. The founders believed in the triumvirate division of government (whichis the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of government) whose rights are bound to eachother. When one part of the government does injustice, it affects all of the government. Some of ourpolitical leaders claim to love life and liberty, but they pervert our rights by promoting illegal wars andplunders. The right to life is more important than the right to property since one's lives is more thanany possession. Yet, the right to property is vitally linked to the right to life since the right to ownproperty is an extension of the right to life. Property is simply what an individual rightfully owns.Labor can improve property as well. We can use our body, conscience, and our actions to improvethe realms of our property. Labor for the individual can improve our happiness as well. That iswhy we shouldn't deny an innocent person the right to own property (or legally benefit in hisor her own labor. Theres always value in labor). The Founding Fathers of Jefferson, Madison,Samuel Adams and others realized that the paramount role of government in essence was theprotection of our liberties. In the 21st century, threats to our civil liberties occur constantly. That's allthe more reason for us to be more educated on our rights. We shouldn't accept deception and weought to love the truth

While numerous Americans are blinded to our diminished liberty, the big, centralgovernment operators abide to enact policies detrimental to our fundamental God-givenrights. It just seems that the world will sink even lower in trying to eliminate the need for rationality.For thousands of years, laws in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Europe influenced our laws inAmerica (like the Constitution, state laws, etc.). A heavy contributor to our law is the Magna Cartathat was created in 1215. This law restricted the excessive power of Kings and other rulers in theland of Britain. The Magna Carta created rules that developed habeas corpus and the right of juries

to determine cases. Habeas corpus protects us from being imprisoned unlawfully. It made KingJohn of England to proclaim certain rights to freemen and respect rights. It confirmedcommon law that influenced the legal perimeters of the English speaking world. The EnglishBill of Rights from 1689 (including George Masons 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights) was agroup of legitimate laws that inspired the existence of the Bill of Rights as well. The English Bill ofRights supported explicitly the right of the people to petition the King. The people have a right to givegrievances to those holding office. The Blackstones Commentaries is one of the greatest legaldocuments in history. Its related to our U.S. laws and outlined key, succinct principles that are

universally legitimate to respect plus accept in our lives. In Book 1, Chapter 1 of Blackstones

Commentaries the point is made that every individual has the right of petitioning theking, or either house of parliament, for the redress of grievance. These Commentaries hadpro-life and other pro-liberty provisions in them as well. Of course, the Bill of Rights endorsed

a host freedoms like the freedom of speech, the freedom of religion, the right to not be searchedwithout a warrant or probable cause, the right to have a trial by jury, to not have cruel and unusualpunishment, etc. You have to appreciate the Anti-Federalists in supporting the Bill of Rights. Sincewithout them, the Federalists like Alexander Hamilton could have their way in getting rid of the Bill ofRights centuries ago. Civil liberties should be protected not only among those with whom we agreewith, but also with those people we disagree with.

The mainstream media may spin, but our liberties are being violated all of the time. There can belong books on even simple examples of this. One easy example is the abrupt militarized policeusing random searches against innocent citizens of major cities like New York City. Nationwide,


3/25

there are illegal checkpoint monitoring citizens even within the border. The deal is that the DHS canset up an internal checkpoints in the United States anywhere in the region (of ca. 100 miles of theactual border) and question citizens. There is the U.S. Border Patrol having a policy of using 100miles from the border designed as border checkpoints. These illegal checkpoints force citizens toanswer questions about their citizenships. One person named Edgar Ayala (a Forks High Schoolathlete and graduate with honors) was arrested in August 20, 2008. He was later deported toMexico. People have demonstrated against the Forks Border Patrol checkpoint. Theserandom checkpoints definitely have an authoritarian feel to the society of the U.S. Even theACLU opposes this strange policy as a Constitutional free zone. This is occurring in NewMexico as well. The mainstream media like those from MSNBC (who is owned by GE plus others.General Electric is a transnational corporation that manufactures helicopter engines used in Iraqand Afghanistan. GE is complicit in the war on terror, yet so-called liberals are on there trying tolecture us on issues) are whining about protesters using their First Amendment right disagreeingwith Obamacare when our Founding Fathers and colonial people back in the day did a lot more thanjust yell at people. They used self defense against the imperialist British redcoats, threw tea in thewater, went out and preached against tyranny, yelled at the top of their lungs to disagree with the

policies of the Crown, and other things. Not only is GE complicit in mass murder, it also pledguilty in federal court to civil and criminal charges of defrauding the Pentagon and agreedto pay $69 million to the U.S. government in fines one of the largest defense contracting

fines ever. Its hypocritical to condemn the protesters as so-called right wing extremists whenthese protesters exist from all sides of the political spectrum. Even ABC News had to admits that

these protesters are real and arent funded by the health care insurance industry at all. ThenCongress people wont even read the health care bill (It has over 1,000 pages in it.It can potentially fund abortion and have a centralized database) then expect us toaccept it. The health care bill limits judicial review as well. There is nothing wrongwith being respectful in expressing dissent, but being angry or yelling isnt illegal. Its totallyAmerican to yell at evil people, criminals, or deceivers trying to violate the Bill of Rights andConstitution. Its not anti-democratic (as that Mormon Harry Reid lied about) to democratically

speak your mind. Some of these hypocrites omit how a protester (who was anAfrican American male called racial slurs by hypocritical liberal extremists)

was assaulted by SEIU thugs near St. Louis Missouri. There is an AfricanAmerican woman (who is a proponent of Barack Obamas health careproposal) whose sign of Rosa Parks was tore up by an old man for noreason whatsoever. That was evil. She claims that racism was the motive forthe sign tore up since she said that other signs were in the building withslurs, etc. I dont believe in harassing people or unfairly demonizing anyone like PresidentBarack Obama, but expressing our First Amendment rights in a constructive way is fine with me.CFR member and managing director of Kissinger and Associates David Rothkopf called Americansand those who oppose the Obama health care plan morons like the coward he is. David denies thatthe government wants to pull the plug on grandma in the health care bill.

Under Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled Advance Care Planning Consultation,

practitioners must explain the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available,including palliative care and hospice, in other words the government will be in the

business of recommending euthanasia in order to bend the curve on health care costs, asCharles Lane noted in The Washington Post. This isnt equivalent to euthanasia, but this iswrong since the government has no right to recommend end of life procedures toward

anyone. Thats between the patient, the family, and a doctor not the government. Also,some authors of this bill and White House officials like Ezekiel Emanuel want a scale ofcoverage depending on age. Later, this liar Rothkopf says that we have nothing to complain


4/25

about. Thats a lie since exporting millions of jobs to foreign slave labor gulags, stealingtrillions of dollars from the people and giving it to the criminal banksters, polluting the

food supply with GMO and soft kill weapons, installing a military police state and high-tech surveillance grid, and torching the very fabric of the Constitution and the Bill of Rightsare legitimate items to complain about. He demonizes Christians and others. His mentality

is what exactly the global elite think of us. They think of us as cattle and obstacles to theirsick global government plans. We have a right to disagree with David Rothkopfsextremism completely. The lies arent working since most people oppose the banker takeover,the gun grabbing, the violations of our civil liberties, and other evils. Even President George W.Bush has been terrible in terms of civil liberties. He passed laws that violated the Bill ofRights and Constitution like the Patriot Act, FISA Amendments Act of 2008, Violent Radicalizationand Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, he allowed torture policies to exist (as supported byJohn Yoo and others), Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, Amended Presidential Executive Orders,and the revocation of Posse Comitatus Act (in his various executive orders and laws).

*Our civil liberties are definitely worth fighting for. For the longest time, Ive wanted to write aboutthis issue. Now, I have a chance to do it. Some members of Congress and the elite are liars. Theyclaim that they want common ground on abortion and then they refuse to get rid of Roe (which is afederal takeover of the abortion issue). They claim to not to get rid of our guns when they supportanti-gun legislation in the Congress. Even Rahm Emanuel wants everyone in the no-fly list to not

own guns when many people in that list are innocent of any crime. Legislation sponsored by the


5/25

The Government Accountability Office seeks to close the gap and prevent victims of theterrorist watch list from being able to purchase firearms. They claim that vaccines are all safewhen even mainstream scientists have exposed some dangerous vaccines for decades. They claimthat the climate bill is beneficial when much of the carbon trading system will financially benefitpeople like Al Gore and Maurice Strong. It will give taxpayer money into big corporation andinternational institutions. The climate change bill wont effect big polluters China or India at all. It will

give polluters a free pass to pollute if they have a carbon tax. The carbon tax/cap and trade planshave been rejected even in European nations (along with many scientists rejecting man-madeglobal warming). The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act would similarly criminalize freespeech on the Internet if it can be deemed in any way to have been harmful to an individual.Harmful is ambiguous at best that can limit free speech. This represents the end of politicalblogging and free speech on the world wide web if these bill was passed and enforced. . Peopledont trust the establishment in increasing numbers. Individuals want to be legitimately free.

Police Brutality

Police brutality is always evil. Frankily, you have to thank cell phone cameras and other videosrecording it. If these items never existed, the police would of lied and denied most police brutalityexisting in the first place. The Republican National Conventions police response in 2008 was worsethan even the DNC. The reason might be that more criticism is directly toward the Republicans.That still is never an excuse for the law authorities to arrest innocent protestors in St. Paul,

Minnesota at all. There is many examples of illegal crackdown of dissent in the Minnesota area.Indy bay from September 2, 2008 outlined how a woman was pepper sprayed in the face by thepolice. She was innocent and was assaulting no one at all. She was just showing a flower to themilitarized police with black uniforms (looking like the Nazis). Glenn Greenwald from Salon onSeptember 2, 2008 classified the RNC 2008 as the most militarized convention on record.

There has been raids against innocent people. One example was Amy Goodman (though aLeft Gatekeeper) was unlawfully arrested in downtown St. Paul, Minnesota during that time.She was trying to free two Democracy Now producers who were also being unlawfully detained.They are Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar. They were arrested while carrying out their


6/25

journalistic duties in covering street demonstrators in the RNC. Goodman was assaulting no oneand questioned the officers. Protestors were attacked with tear gas as well. It isn't just them. Otherjournalists have been harassed as well. For example, members of I-Witness Video, which is a NewYork-based media watchdog group that records police activity in order to protect civil liberties, werearrested for no reason by police. Armed police surrounded one of the members' home. GlenGreenwald has been on the front lines exposing this. Glenn Greenwald reminded readers onSunday, that the Minneapolis Joint Terrorist Task Force spent months recruiting people to spy onactivist groups who were planning on to protest the RNC. So, Glen deserves credit on the policeoppression in these affairs. It doesn't take rocket science to know certain aspects of the governmentwant certain forms of dissent quelled in American soil. These events aren't extraordinary. Militarizedpolice were in many conventions before 2008 and raids against innocent citizens have beencommon place for decades. Now, people are starting to realize this police state atmosphere existsnot only in America, but throughout the world. It's worse in other countries where you can bearrested and jailed for just dissenting with the status quo of the government like China, SaudiArabia, Iran, North Korea, etc. Andrew Meyer was tasered for just answering a question. That can'tbe a reality in the future if we want our civil liberties protected. Government has always worked bestwhen it's limited by what it can and can't do. The government and law enforcement should be heldaccountable for these immoral duties.

Tara Vreeland from NewsOn6 on June 12, 2009 described news about the EMT wantingaccountability from the Oklahoma Highway Patrol. EMT Maurice White says he is in a way glad thatthe scuffle with the Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper occurred. The reason is that it means thatproblems will be addressed and dealt with. He wants accountability from the OHP as he told theNews On 6. This situation can never happen again, said Maurice White. Maurice White doesn'twant to see anyone else in the position that he was in at the business end of a choke-hold fromOklahoma Highway Patrol Trooper Daniel Martin. White thinks that it will happen again to someoneelse unless some questions are answered. Maurice White wants light on the problems with the OHPand in order for things to move forward. White says even when flattened against his ambulance, hewas worried about the patient in the back. It was a woman suffering from possible heat exhaustionwhom he and his partner were taking to a hospital. The truth is while a cop is choking an innocentman (who wasn't even yelling at the cop), a woman was strapped to a gurney with an IV, and EKG,

and oxygen. This person can't moved and she is hearing her family members scream outside thatwas tortured for her. She never deserved that. They (or his partner Paul Franks) didn't deserve thistreatment from Trooper Martin. If a trooper did this to another trooper or other professionals, thattrooper would be fired or suspended for a long time. The paramedics never started the scuffle asthe dash cam video proves. The trooper was out of control and showed total disregard for thepatient in the ambulance completely. The trooper said that he returning from Iraq caused him to actin that fashion, which is a lame excuse. White told The News On 6 he holds the OHP in the highestregard and says they generally are the epitome of professionalism when it comes to police work.White's lawyer, Richard O'Carroll, told The News On 6 that he will get the dash cam video, but it willtake a lawsuit to do so which means there could be a civil lawsuit in the future. This should beAmerica not a dictatorship. Unfortunately, dictator-like laws and policies exist in the United States ofAmerica. So, police brutality is an epidemic that must stop.


7/25

More Extreme Police Brutality is definitely occurring in America. William N. Grigg from ProLibertate on May 31, 2009 have exposed this issue for many years. Irma Marquez was abusedby Yonkers Police Officer Wayne Simoes. She is recuperating in a hospital. She was accused of"disorderly conduct" and second degree obstruction of governmental administration. Irma is a 45year old woman from Yonkers, NY. She was physically assaulted in public in front of manywitnesses.The incident was captured clearly on a surveillance videotape. The abuse was so bad


8/25

that she had a head injury, a loss of consciousness, memory loss, a jaw fracture, 2 black eyes,facial contusions, severe swelling and bruising, hemorrhaging in both eyes, lacerations to the nose,etc. You get the picture. You see that some of these cops are getting away of this stuff daily. It isn'tjust affecting minorities or the poor (which is wrong and we know about from the news, etc.). It'saffecting all Americans for injustice against one person, affects all people worldwide. A Federal jurymisplaced justice once again. She wasn't responsible for those injuries, but the injustice continued.Irma was just a home health worker. The police officer was never charged with criminal assault orany crime at all. On Wednesday (May 26), a federal jury ruled that Yonkers Police Officer WayneSimoes didnt violate Marquezs civil rights when he lifted her from her feet and slammed her face-first into the floor of the La Fonda restaurant on March 3, 2007. Simoes tried to stop a drunkenmelee at La Fonda. Marquez had too much to drink and was concerned about her niece. Her niecewas injured in the brawl. Marquez stumbled to officers like Simoes. A generation ago, most of thepolice would allow her to leave the room with restraint. Simoes jacked her arm, bear hugged her,and picked up her face then slamming her to the floor. Irma is bleeding at her feet. No one aidesher. Simoes put a knee on her back to arrest her. Testifying at the trial, Officer John Liberatorestated that Simoes clearly used excessive force against Marquez. The prosecution didn't want

Fredericks' assessment of Simoes' action. Even though Westchester County DistrictAttorney Janet DiFioredidnt see fit to file criminal charges against the bully who face-plantedMarquez, she zealously prosecuted the victim on spurious criminal charges that were quickly

disposed of by a jury in May 2008. Janet was a hypocrite for lecturing on domestic violence whenIrma was subjected to violence by a crooked cop. Wayne Simoes, petty thug and unpunishedabuser of women, prefers to be called by the supposedly exalted title Officer. Marquez is not a realofficer. He's a coward and an abuser of a woman.

Homeland Security


9/25

This has been a recently created bureaucracy that came about in 2001. People have accusedthis organization as going to be used to suspend the Constitution and create a dictatorial

New World Order under the guise of martial law. Representative Ron Paul from Texas

has observed that this represents the biggest government reorganization since the

creation of the Department of Defense in the 1940s, and potentially the single biggest

expansion of the federal government in our history. With this plan, ex-PresidentGeorge W. Bush and Thomas Ridge, a Knight of Columbus and ex-head of Homeland

SSecurity, did try to to revoke the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. This great law divulged

that the U.S. military couldnt attack civilian citizens of the United States or face fines

and/or imprisonment. Air Force General Ralph E. Eberhardt (one of the

heads of the military industrial complex during the 9/11 tragedy), head of the Bushs

new military Northern Command and even Democrat Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr. of

Delaware endorsed the ending of the Posse Comitatus Act.

This act should be preserved. Homeland SSecurity is one of the many expansions of the

Executive Brach and that branch has too much power already in this country. TheHomeland Defense Agency and Homeland SSecurity was conceived in the Clinton

administration. Two men from two parties proposed it made up of Gary Hart [CFRglobalist and Democrat] and Warren Rudman [Republican] in their The Phase III Report

of the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century which is nothing more than a

framework for a permanent military bureaucratic American police state. Homeland

SSecurity reorganizes the whole executive and legislature functions of the U.S.

government. It makes the National Guard a national police force and federalizes the work

of science, mathematics, engineering, and made of tons of bureaucracies, etc. The illegalHomeland SSecurity agency is built upon FEMA. FEMA have blatant protocols on how toget rid of our Constitution and God-given rights during martial law which is illegal and

immoral. Homeland SSecurity is even given power to control the border security, the CoastGuard, Custom Service, Border Patrol, and Transportation. Homeland SSecurity will also

try to rule over activities of the Department of Defense and assume duties from theDepartment of Commerce to the FBI. This all was a reality by November 25, 2002 whenthe Homeland SSecurity Act of 2002 passed. Its made up of 40 governmental agencies and

most of the Presidents Cabinet. The word Homeland is Nazi in of itself given the

context of this Beast Security by reason of Adolf Hitler describing Nazi Germany as

the Homeland. In German, the word Homeland means Vaterland or Fatherland

so Ridges job is the same as Heinrich Himmler in Nazi Germany heading the S.S. and

Gestapo.


10/25

The Second Amendment Part 2

"The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been

the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever

standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms

is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already

annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."

-Blackstone's 1768 "Commentaries on the Laws of England"

"A people armed and free forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition and is a

bulwark for

the nation against foreign invasion and domestic oppression."

-James Madison (1751-1836), Father of the Constitution for the USA, 4th USPresident


11/25

The war on gun rights is real. Even the English Bill of Rights from 1689 supported the right of peopleto bear arms for their defense as allowed by law. The 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the

Constitution perfectly says that citizens have a right to bear arms as exposed by these words: "..Awell regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, theright of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."The FoundingFathers uniformly believed that the people had the individual right to bear arms. According to thewritings cited in "That Every Man Be Armed." "Mr. Madison has introduced long-expectedamendmentsIt contains a bill of rightsthe right of the people to bear arms." -Trench Coxe (p.76). Even the Supreme Court in the Heller vs. D.C. case says that the Second Amendment pertainsto individual gun rights. People may deny that some people want to take away our guns, but somedo. One example is how Diane Feinstein desired to ban firearms from citizens. The Violence PolicyCenter group says that: "...gun] Licensing systems are very expensive to administer ... licensingand registration in America would have little effect on the vast majority of gun violence. [We are]the largest national gun control advocacy group seeking a ban on handgun production. (Politics,

paranoia fuel war of words over guns, The Times Union, October 18, 2004). Janet Reno said: "Themost effective means of fighting crime in the United States is to outlaw the possession of any type offirearm by the civilian populace." (Addressing a 1984 B'nai B'rith gathering in Coral Gables, Florida,per affidavit written by Fred Diamond of Miami). Barack Obama may not want to do it, but hesupports so much anti-gun restrictions that even innocent citizens will be greatly restricted on howthey possess a firearms. There are stories where those with guns have saved other people's lives.

Some dissent with that anti-gun agenda of the elite so much that some states are trying to takeaction. Montana wants to stop federal gun control laws. Montana's proposed gun laws mayhave the basis for a court showdown over states' rights (if the governor signs a bill torelease some firearms in the state from federal regulation). The proposed law aims toexempt firearms, weapons components and ammunition made in Montana and kept inMontana from federal gun laws. The bill wants to prevent federal gun laws from effecting

Montana, because Montana already has gun laws there. This can allow gun owners andseller to not be bound under federal regulations, license requirements, and backgroundchecks completely. "We'd like to just be able to make our own guns here in Montana andhave the feds stay out of it," said Gary Marbut of the Montana Shooting Sports Association,which helped draft the bill. House Bill 246 sailed through the Montana Legislature, butDemocratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer has not yet offered a position on the measure, whichawaits his action. The federal ATF hadn't made a firm position on the issue. "ATF is notgoing to take a position on this because we don't make any of the laws, we just enforce thelaws that Congress makes," said Carrie DiPirro. DiPirro is the spokeswoman for the Denverfield division, which oversees Montana. Congress can regulate interstate commerce as theConstitution says. This is why some promote gun regulation in America. In essence, those inMontana want the House Bill 246 to pass, because it promotes state's rights. The SecondAmendment or gun rights is great to promote. Barack Obama may not want to ban all guns

in America, but some of his allies do. Even Eric Holder supported the D.C. gun ban. That's allthe more reason to promote the truth and preserve the right of self defense (even using armsif necessary). There are a record number of people owning guns now. According toAmmoland.com, data released by the FBIs National Instant Criminal Background Check System(NICS) reported 1,225,980 checks in April 2009. This figure is a 30.3 percent increase from the940,961 reported in April 2008.

Anti-Gun people are coming out inforce. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is a Democrat. She actslike she is apart of the so-called Blue Dog Coalition, but she plans on introducing an assaultweapons ban weeks ago. Kirsten is a junior Senator from NY that the NRA at one time rated


12/25

her high (because of her supposed advocacy of the 2nd Amendment when she isn't now ).She even posed with fellow gun grabber Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Even Newsdaysaid that Gillibrand transformed into an anti-gun zealot over the course of 3 months. Rep.Caroyln McCarthy brainwashed her to support many anti-gun policies like closing the gunshow loophole, etc. Polls indicate a large percentage of voters strongly support the SecondAmendment. McCarthy's new bill called H.R. 6676 wants to utilize the National Instant

Criminal Background Check System for background checks on all gun store employees anddealers. This is a violation of individual privacy of course. The federal government has noright to know your gun records without due process at all. There are 3 other bills that wouldmake it illegal for known or suspected terrorists to buy guns. See, "suspected" doesn't meanyou're a terrorist. It means suspected, so potentially innocent citizens can be illegallydeprived of their gun rights for just being classified as "suspected terrorists" by thegovernment. The House is currently working on H.R. 2159, The Denying Firearms andExplosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, which is being sponsored by RepublicanRep. Peter King of New York. The bill would increase public safety by permitting theAttorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosiveslicenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist. Larry Pratt said that people who areadvocates of the 2nd Amendment are called terrorists by the DHS "Rightwing Extremism"report, so they could be deprived of their gun rights. Senator Gillibrand is working closely

with gun-grabbing organizations, including New Yorkers Against Gun Violence and theBrady Campaign, according to Matt Canter, Gillibrands spokesman. She sold out to anti-gunspecial interest groups. Of course, the NYC Police Commissioner Ray Kelly love this. Thiscomes under the back drop of the lie that 90% of the guns used to commit crimes in Mexicocomes from America. The truth is that only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crimescenes have been traced to the U.S. Statistics reveal that most of the guns flowing intoMexico come from the black market, Russian crime organizations, South America, Asia,Guatemala, and the Mexican Army. Some want the assault weapons ban despite of it havingno effect on crimes using guns virtually. Democrats are fearful of backlash have told theObama administration they would actively oppose any renewal of the assault weaponsban. Democrat senatorsJon Tester and Max Baucus warned they would strongly opposeany legislation that will infringe upon the rights of individual gun owners. The governmentregularly exploits gun violence as an excuse to target innocent law abiding citizens instead

of solving moral issues in the right way. Solutions are teaching moral principles in society,education, build up communities, don't allow criminals to own a gun, and have concealedcarry laws among citizens. It's imperative for us to learn about the tactics of politicians intrying to destroy the Second Amendment completely.


13/25

Individuals of many races, backgrounds, and ethnic groupslegitimately promoted and fought for self defense, civil liberties, and

gun rights throughout human history.

Some in the LAPD are at it again. There is a CBS news clip in California. It was featuredprominently on the front page of Yahoo.com. It talked about how the LAPD are melting down

40,000 lbs. worth of "illegal weapons." They are doing this in their claim of preventingcriminals from owning them. Yet, the catch is that most of these guns that are beingdestroyed are perfectly legal and were handed in by law abiding citizens (they kept them intheir own home). The propaganda about this situation is staggering for those who knowabout firearms. The CBS clip gives the impression that all guns are illegal and owned bycriminals. This is despite of the fact that the vast majority of the guns shown to be melteddown are rifles and pistols. These weapons are perfectly legal. Were taking illegal weaponsoff the streets and putting them to better use, states the LAPD officer at the end of the clip,failing to mention the fact that most of the guns being destroyed are perfectly legal (andwere handed in by law-abiding citizens who had kept them at home). The anchor believesthat the weapons could of ended up in the hands of criminals, which is a lie since some lawabiding citizens gave up their own guns to be destroyed. The media is implying that theLAPD is going us a favor by destroying legal firearms.Only fully automatic firearms can be

deemed illegal, yet most of the guns shown in the clip, which include a M1 carbine, used indeer hunting, a Walther PPK pistol, as well as a Winchester Ranger Model 120 shotgun.These weapons are completely legal to own. One officer showed a street sweeper Tommygun, which is legal. The new anchors say that guns are delivered off the streets. The LAPDadmits that they actually want legal guns destroyed by saying: Its not just criminals butpeople who have them in their homes that really didnt want them - thats where you get thekids accidentally shooting themselves. The reality is that hardened criminals who want tocommit more criminal actions in the future could care less about sending their guns to thepolice. Law abiding citizens giving up their guns could be defenseless from a home invasion


14/25

by a real criminal. It's Orwellian doublespeak to assume that legal firearms are "illegalweapons." The good news is that more and more people understand that the SecondAmendment is about individuals having the right to own guns if they want to. If you are aninnocent citizen, the government has no right to steal your guns at all. The police have doneworse by stealing weapons from innocent people in the world before from Chicago to NewOrleans.There has been some good news with gun rights. This story is found in the link of:

http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/local/story/Tampa-woman-stops-armed-carjacker-with-her-own-gun/lzk5OlbYpkC5occGcyQP_w.cspx. A Tampa woman stops an armed carjackerwith her own gun. She refused to be a victim. A person gun on her car in May of 2009. Thewoman wanted to identify herself as "Adrianna." "I just leaned forward and punched him in theforehead with my gun," she said. The man "screamed like a girl and almost dropped his gun" as heran away, she added. The Tampa police have arrested one suspect so far in what they see apattern of carjackings. A-Keem Carr was arrested on related charges, but 2 others are believed tobe preying on motorists in the Westshore area. Adrianna was pulling into the International Mall whenthe armed man jumped in her car. She talked about defending herself. "I didn't want to have toshoot...anyway over a car. But if it was going to be him or me..." Tampa Police warn the suspectsare becoming more aggressive and may be prone to violence. Adrianna did the right thing to protectherself from a criminal. Now, the Second Amendment has been a key law that saved tons of livesthroughout America for centuries.


15/25

Bowling for Columbine

I wanted to show information on this issue for a very long time. A very prominent filmmaker sums upone description for Michael Moore. What propelled him to mighty notoriety was Roger and Me.That movie was about how General Motors downsized jobs and destroyed the working classcommunities in Flint, Michigan. Bowling for Columbine in my mind is the #1 lying, misleadingpropaganda flick about gun rights in history. Despite Michael Moore earning an Oscar for it, its afake documentary. David T. Hardy and others have demolished this film so bad that heres 3 majorlies that Moore exhibited which are refuted:

1. Lie #1: Moore tried to equate the NRA to the KKK. He claimed that the NRA was founded in 1871at the same time when the Klan became an illegal terrorist organization. He created an animatedsequence where a Klansman became a NRA member to help light up a burning cross.

The Truth: Former Union officers by the act of the New York Legislature found the National Rifle

Association in 1871. The Klan was invented in 1866 and quickly became a terrorist organization. Itbecame illegal by the Ku Klux Klan Act and the Enforcement Act in 1871 by President Ulysses S.

Grant. Grant's vigor in disrupting the Klan earned him unpopularity among many

whites, but Frederick Douglass praised him, and an associate of Douglass wrote thatAfrican-Americans "will ever cherish a grateful remembrance of his name, fame and greatservices." Grant fought the Klan and was the 8th President of the NRA. The KKK has absolutely norelationship with the NRA at all. When Grant left office, the NRA elected General Philip Sheridan,who removed the governors of Texas and Louisiana for failure to suppress the KKK. In fact, the


16/25

JPFO (or the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Organization) recorded numerous racist guncontrol laws against African Americans and Jews. For example, a French Black Code in 1751prevented blacks in Louisiana to own firearms. There were racist gun control laws in the U.S. fromthe 1700s to the 1900s (I.e. The Black Codes, gun bans in the pre and post Civil War South, etc.).The Gun Control Act of 1938 restricted Jews to possess firearms, which was supported by theNazis.

In the 1950s and 1960s, blacks organized as NRA chapters to obtain surplus military rifles to fightoff Klansmen. Extreme gun control is truly racist. History bears out this fact.

2. Lie #2: Michael Moore claimed that Charlton Hestons cold dead hands speech was in a Denvermeeting that related to Columbine. .

The Truth: The annual NRA meeting in Denver, which was preplanned. It had nothing to do with the

events of Columbine. Heston's "cold dead hands" speech, which leads off Moore's

depiction of the Denver meeting, was not given at Denverafter Columbine. It was given

a year later in Charlotte, North Carolina, and was his gesture of gratitude upon his beinggiven a handmade musket, at that annual meeting.

3. Lie #3: Moore believed that the shooting at Bwell Elementary School in Michigan where a little boykilled Karyla Roland is an example of the need to extremely limit or ban gun rights. He further saidthat the kid (who he portrays as a sympathetic youngster, which is sick) was from a strugglingfamily, found a gun in his uncles house, and took it to school making people wonder why he shotthe little girl.

The Truth: The boy acted wild and he was suspended from school. He fought with Karyla on the daybefore he killed her. The uncles house was a crack house and the gun was stolen by his uncle inexchange for drugs. This was a dysfunctional family. This wasnt a normal family and the gun wasstolen. This gun wasnt used by a law abiding citizen at all.

4. Lie #4: Moore wonders whether kids at Columbine might be driven to violence because of

the "weapons of mass destruction" made in Lockheed Martin's assembly plant in Littleton.Moore shows giant rockets being assembled.

The Truth: Lockheed Martin's plant in Littleton doesn't make weapons. It makes space

launch vehicles for TV satellites.

5. Lie # 5: Moore implies that his film is trying to stop fear mongering.

The Truth: The whole film is an example of fear mongering directed against the Second

Amendment. In it, Moore wants us to fear almost everything: Guns; gun-owners; America;K-Mart bullets; Lockheed-Martin; Dick Clark; Charlton Heston. He says that guns are the

problem in crime, yet he supports more police in areas to use guns to stop crime in LosAngeles, and other places. This is hypocrisy on Michael Moores part since guns alonedont kill people. People kill people in a myriad of resources since the dawn of humanhistory.


17/25

History involving Self Defense and Gun Rights

There is a long history pertaining to how self defense have been crucial to survival.This history definitely inspired the establishment of the Second Amendment as itsa vital part of the Second Amendment. Some folks, even those with a collegeeducation, are ignorant on the history of the Second Amendment. As manyrealized, the Founding Fathers read the classical works of Tacitus and Livy inorder to learn the errors of the Roman Empire and make their government better


18/25

than the components of the ancient Roman Empire. John Adams wrote that wheneverhe read Thucydides and Tacitus, "I seem to be only reading the History of my own Timesand my own Life." Thomas Jefferson even commented that many Romans chose suicidethan rather live their lives under an Emperor. I dont agree with suicide though. Julius

Caesar was a famous tyrant and murderer. After he used his army to subdue Rome, he

fought against Gaul. Julius Caesar stole arms of the conquered towns or areas he collected.Henceforth, some founding Fathers like James Madison wrote in Federalist 41 that "the

liberties of Rome proved the final victim to her military triumphs." In other words, ifstanding armies arent regulated properly, a tyrannical society is all but a certain to occur.Some ancient Romans had commonsense though. Cicero was a writer who rightfully

commented that carrying a weapon for lawful defense is fine, while carrying a weapons todo a crime is evil. He defended Titus Annius Milo in 53 B.C. for the murder of Publius

Claudius Pulcher. Cicero believed that In several specific ways, America itself has becomevery similar to the Roman Empire. These similarities between the Roman Empire andAmerica now are: both are invading sovereign nation in unjustified circumstances, each

legalized abortion, each once supported the evil of slavery, each are made up of tons of

ethnic groups, each use the Eagle as apart of their national emblem, each pass laws thatviolate individual liberties, and each have a vivrant Christian population in its borders.

Radical gun control didnt start with the ACLU or others. Even in England, King Henry VII

prohibited poor people from shooting crossbows or guns. Thats evil of course. In the1600s, Charles II and James II passed similar measure to disarm people deemeduntrustworthy, they forced gunsmiths to register guns that they have workedon, and limited the import of guns. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 occurred.This allowed William and Mary to become the new monarchs. They wrote theirBill of Rights to guarantee people the right to keep arms in these words:

That the subjects which are protestants, may have arms for their defencesuitable to their conditions, and as allowed by law. (Walter Laquer and BarryRubin, ed., The Human Rights Reader, [New York: New American Library, 1979],106).

Of course, anybody deserves the right to bear arms, not just the Protestants. Thearea of colonial America had much more freedom than England did. Gun controllaws did exist in colonial America though. Some of these gun control laws werevery racist. Massachusetts and Plymouth colonies ban the sale of guns to NativeAmericans. Some black people back in 1700s and 1800s were restricted or evenbanned to own firearms (even if they were innocent citizens). Some laws were pro-

gun. A 1632 statute of Plymouth Colony ordered that every freeman or otherinhabitant of this colony provide for himselfe and each under him able to bearearmes a sufficient musket and other serviceable peece for war with bandaleroesand other appurtenances with what speede may be. These previous words arein older English obviously. The Virginia Declaration of Rights, (which was largelywritten by George Mason on June 12, 1776), nearly echoed verbatim Lockes viewson natural rights. Article One states:


19/25

"That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certaininherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, theycannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, theenjoyment of life, liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing

property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

Article 13 of the Virginia Bill of Rights further states:

"That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trainedto arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that

standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous toliberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict

subordination to, and governed by, the civil power."

More Gun Facts and Statistics

1). According to this source (of Violence, Guns and Drugs: A Cross-Country Analysis, Jeffery A. Miron,Department of Economics, Boston University, University of Chicago Press Journal of Law & Economics,October 2001), countries with the strictest gun control laws also tended to have the highest homicide rates.According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics from September 2004 (and the NaitonsEducational Scientific and Cultural Organization in 2005), Brazils homicide rate is almost 3 timeshigher than the U.S. rate. Brazil has mandatory, licensing, registration, and maximum personal


20/25

ownership quotas. Brazil bans any new sales to private citizens. Since the mostly gun bans inBritain, its crime rates has accelerated worse.

2). Gun registration doesnt completely work. According to David B. Kopel in 1992, Boston,Cleveland, and California have city and state registration of assault weapons. The compliance ratein Boston and Cleveland in the early 1990s was about 1%. Ton Drane wrote an article called WhyGun Registration will Fail in the May 1997 of the Australian Shooters. Now, he found that Germany

began comprehensive gun registration in 1972. The government estimated that between

17,000,000 and 20,000,000 guns were to be registered, but only 3,200,000 surfaced,

leaving 80% unaccounted for. Even in Canada, gun registration of handguns in 1934

have caused over half of the registered handguns to be confiscated without compensation

in 2001. In Australian government confiscated over 660,000 previously legal weapons fromcitizens. So, to assume that registration by the federal government cant lead to confiscation isa myth. It historically happened before in Bermuda, Cuba, Greece, Ireland, Jamaica, andGeorgia as well.

3). According to theJournal of Criminal Law and Criminology, from Fall 1995, every year, people inthe United States use guns to defend themselves against criminals an estimated 2,500,000

times more than 6,500 people a day, or once every 13 seconds.151 Of these instances, 15.6%of the people using firearms defensively stated that they "almost certainly" saved their lives bydoing so.Firearms are used 60 times more often to protect lives than to take lives. TheNational Crime Victimization Survey from 2000 mentioned that when using guns in self defense, 91.1% of thetime, not a single shot is fired.

4). As of July 2006, 39 states have right to carry concealed carry laws. This is the majority

of the American population. Statistics show that in these states the crime rate fell after

the right to carry law have become active. 9 states restrict the right to carry and 2

deny it outright. A Gallup survey from May of 2008 confirms that 73% of Americans believe

the 2nd

Amendment guarantees the right to keep guns, and that a mere 20% believe it exists

to enable state militias.

Certain people believe that there aren't folks who want to ban all guns, but they are sadlymistaken. Here's just some words by a few of these anti-gun extremists.

Diane Feinstein, U.S. Senator from California:"Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe." (Associated

Press, November 18, 1995)

Rosie O'Donnell, Ex-TV Talk Show Hostess:"I think there should be a law-and I know this is extreme-that non one can have a gun in theU.S. If you have a gun, you go to jail. Only the police should have guns." (Ottowa Sun,

April 29, 1999) [Note by me: Funny Rosie since even the Supreme Court ruled that the

police aren't even required to protect every citizen in the U.S. and the phone # 9-11


21/25

can cause delay a simple gun used in self defense by preventing crime. Also, Rosie,

you have a bodyguard who has a gun, so you're just a hypocrite whose a liberal

extremist which can validate anything with the gun issue by fact so you cry fowl.]

Major Owens, U.S. Representative from New York:

"We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing and import of handguns. From there weregister the guns which we are currently owned, and follow that wi th additional bans andacquisitions of handguns and rifles with no spring purpose."

*This is a small taste of the anti-gun extremists who don't fully value the Bill of Rights

for if you actually honored the Bill of Rights, they would accept the 2nd Amendment

100% graciously which they don't at all. People like Senator Dick Durbin, Senator Arlen

Spector, Schumer, Feinstein, and others just want to deprive us Americans our right to

bear arms. People have a right to own all types of firearms.

CFR member George Soros is working with the United Nations to harm the SecondAmendment. A video shows that Rebecca Peters (who is the director of the InternationalAction Network on Small Arms or the IANSA) is working with the United Nations plus

government globally to grab guns. They are funded by the globalist George Soros. Peters isthe Chair of the National Coalition for Gun Control. This group campaigned to tightenAustralias gun laws in the 1990's according to Umut Foundation (which is an organization

that wants individual disarmament in harmony with the European Union). Her research andadvocacy helped to get sweeping changes like uniform gun laws across eight states, a banon semiautomatic rifles and shotguns, and a year long buyback that destroyed nearly

700,000 weapons. Peters received the 1996 Australian Human Rights Medal for hercountry's highest human rights honor. Prior to working with IANSA, Peters worked for

Soros' Open Society Institute. Soros has dedicated a large percentage of his income gainedfrom manipulating international stock and currency markets to push for gun control. Heexploits many establishment liberals and push his gun grabbing agenda. George Sorosfunnels cash via his OSI or the Open Society Institute to anti-gun groups like the Tides

Foundation, the HELP Network and SAFE Colorado. "...He and seven rich friends foundedtheir own political committee Campaign for a Progressive Future and spent $2

million on political activities in 2000, including providing the prime financial backing forthe Million Mom March. OSI has supported UN efforts to create international gun controlregulations and has singled out the United States for failing to go along with the

international gun-prohibitionists, notes the NRA. The bottom line is that internationalgun banners want every gun every single gun worldwide to be under U.N. andgovernment control, notes Wayne LaPierre of the NRA. And that includes your rifle,

your shotgun, your handgun, and even family heirlooms that have been handed down fromgeneration to generation. Before Lou Dobbs was forced out of CNN, he exposed that theBarack Obama administration stands behind CIFTA or the Inter-American Convention

Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms. Obama and crew are pushingthis treaty under the pretense that it will disarm drug cartels and criminals. The treaty'saspect introduces major gun control and most of which will affect average citizens. It can


22/25

nullify the 2nd Amendment completely. In 2009, Barack Obama told Mexican PresidentFelipe Calderon that he would do everything in his power to get the U.S. Senate to pass the

treaty. Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, international legal obligationsare superior rank to national law. If the CIFTA treaty is ratified, and not having defined theexceptions to its many requirements within our Constitution, it would usurp U.S.

sovereignty and open the door to additional legislation to support its application in U.S.law. Obviously, the United Nations, from its very inception, has been one of the worldsmost ardent gun control proponents. As anyone who has ever driven by the U.N. building in

New York City knows, a huge statue of an American-made revolver with its barrel twistedin the shape of a pretzel greets every visitor. The CIFTA treaty is one of the U.N.s petprojects in order to achieve this long-held ambition, writes Chuck Baldwin. In October of

2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told the United Nations something. She told themthat the U.S. would support negotiations of an Arms Treaty to regulate international guntrafficking. 2 weeks earlier, the U.S. joined a nearly unanimous 153-1 U.N. vote to adopt a

resolution setting out a timetable on the proposed Arms Trade Treaty including an U.N.conference to produce a final accord in 2012. It's no secret that the U.N. have had a hostility

toward gun rights for years. Secretary Annan back years ago called for internationalcontrols on firearms like world leaders even then French President Jacques Chirac desired aglobal tax on firearms. The UN Security Council's "Report of the Group of Governmental

Experts on Small Arms" called for a comprehensive program of worldwide gun control andpraises the restrictive gun policies of China and France. The dismantling of the SecondAmendment as proposed by Soros, the U.N., and the globalists are apparent. They want an

international treaty to make that reality more apparent. No one in the mainstream media iscovering this issues except Lou Dobbs, who was unceremoniously bounced out of themedia recently.

Threats Against Homeschooling Worldwide

Hitler's Nazis banned homeschooling in their degenerate rise to power. To this day, Germanybans all homeschooling. The German Court recently forced 5 kids of a family to be held instate custod, because their parents homeschool their children. The case came about fr 6hours in a grueling German Family Court session in early August. The Gorber familyregained custody of their 3 year old son. The judge retained custody though of the 5 otherGorber children to the state. The case is having a pending deal with the government trying toforce psychological evaluations of their parents. The court did allow increased visitation forsome of the children up from one hour every two weeks that had been permitted since the children

were seized in a surprise raid by the youth welfare office ("Jugendamt") and police. In January of2008, Jugendamt and police officials surrounded the German home of the family while Mr. Gorbervisited his wife at a local hospital where she had been admitted due to complications from herpregnancy with her ninth child. The oldest son, age 21, and a daughter, age 20, were not taken bythe authorities, but all the other children were removed despite their repeated protests. This act wasplan fascism plain and simple. They forced the children out of their family's home. The Jugendamthas been criticized for their excessive tactics. Once, fines were given to homeschoolers in Germanyand other punishments are being enacted. That's why German homeschoolers have fled Germany.This is wrong. A member of the SPD party in Bavaria, Germany also stated in a recent radiointerview that that "Imprisonment or fines in this matter are absolutely excessive in my opinion,


23/25

because homeschooling can provide very high-quality outcomes. This topic is definitely one whichwe must work through politically. There can be no black-white declarations, but we must discuss thiswithout ideological blinders on." That's why pure educational choice and educational freedom oughtto be promoted and perserved worldwide (not just in America).

The German government had dropped the charges against a homeschooling family. The

charges relate to criminal child neglect. The German mother and father faced up to 2 yearsin jail. They also faced the loss of custody for homeschooling five of their children. This isaccording to a report from the International Human Rights Group. Spokesman Jose Thorton

said that his group, which has been working on the case involving the Brause family fromZittau, Germany, heard from the local counsel about the government's decision. TheGerman counsel member named Johannes Hidlerbrandt said that the court and the

prosecutor are dropping the charges against Mr. and Mrs. Brause. The case involvedcustody of Rosine, Jotham, Kurt-Simon, Lovis and Ernst Brause. Thornton said theannouncement came after the court received a detailed psychiatric report that there is no

psychological harm to the children from homeschooling. The report also stated that thechildren have not been harmed, which is evidenced by their exit exams from high school.

This means that the Brause family doesn't face up to 2 years in prison and the potential lossof their children. This decision is a big victory for this family and the home schoolingfamilies of Germany. The Brause family are Christians. They home school their children

because they want to have parental responsibility before God and the law. The Homeschool Legal Defense Association researched this case closely as well. The HLDA help theUwe and Hannelore family from Bissingen, Germany to escape persecution because they've

homeschooled their children. Germany has a Nazi-era law that requires all children toattend public school. They justify this fascist law by claiming that they want to controlwhich philosophical convictions are taught by parents at home. Therefore, home schooling

in under seize in Germany since independent home schooling is banned in that nation.Now, I believe in educational freedom. Therefore, a parent has the right to send theirchildren to any form of education that they desire.


24/25

Jury Nullification

Jury Nullification is an important legal concept to comprehend. Sometimes the judge tries to swaythe jury in how to vote on a specific case. The judge's real role in a trial is to be a neutral referee intelling the jury about the case (and the jury's rights and responsibilities). A lot of times, the jurors

don't realize their fundamental rights pertaining to a criminal case. The jury has the right to rule onthe law itself and vote on the verdict based to their conscience. Some prosecutors would pressure

getting rid of possible jurors who state their right of following their conscience. John Adams,our second president, had this to say about the juror: "It is not only his rightbut his duty...to find the verdict according to his own best understanding,judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of thecourt." Back then, many jurors realize their right to be notified of this right to judge the law and thedefendant. Even the defense attorney would tell them about this right. The Founding Fathersbelieved that trials should exist by juries of ordinary citizens. These citizens would know totally theirrights as jurors and this would make the government the servant of the people in a proper role notthe master of the people. Even the Constitution provides five separate tribunals with veto power thatare the representatives, senate, executive, judges and jury. Before a law gains the power to punish

that law must first pass the test of each constitutionally guaranteed authority. Even the FoundingFathers accepted jury nullification. That means that the jury is a major way in which a law is testedbefore it is to be enforced. The Founders believed that the enforcement of the law must face

tribunals before they are used to punish criminals.Thomas Jefferson said, "I consider trialby jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man, by which a government can beheld to the principles of its constitution."Later, the jury allowed the freedom of the pressto reign when they found John Peter Zenger not guilty of seditious libel. Zenger criticized theGovernor of the New York colony. The jury rejected a bad law and followed their conscience. Eventhe jury voted to acquit William Penn for preaching Quaker religious doctrine (yet the UK


25/25

government jailed the jurors without food plus water or even toilet facilities for 4 days). England'shighest court later supported the jury's right to find a verdict according to conscience. This led to therecognition of free speech, religious freedom, and peaceable assembly being apart of individualrights. The American Revolution was a respond to the English suppress of trial by juries plus otherrights. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights blatantly supports trial by jury. Juries are a bulwark

against bad laws like preventing slaves from returning to being enslaved again.Jury nullification

is a tool to end bad legal precedents and bad laws in general. Jury nullification powershave been concealed from American citizens (when jurors are only told that facts areonly admitted in court).Researchers in 1966 found that jury nullification occurred only8.8 percent of the time between 1954 and 1958, and suggested that "one reason why thejury exercises its very real power [to nullify] so sparingly is because it is officially told ithas none."An officer of the court today isn't even allowed to tell the jury of their veto power.That is why the Fully Informed Jury Association or the FIJA is trying to educate juries on their

rights to promote liberty plus justice for all. A jury has a right to understand their role in a courtprocedure. However, jury veto power is still recognized. In 1972 the D.C. Circuit Court ofAppeals held that the trial jury has an "...unreviewable and irreversible power...to acquit indisregard of the instruction on the law given by the trial judge." The pages of history shine

upon instances of the jury's exercise of its prerogative to disregard instructions of thejudge; for example, acquittals under the fugitive slave law (473F 2dl 113). Thousands ofinnocent people have been in prison, because the trial juries aren't informed of their rights. Americaimprisons more people than any nation in the world by percentage. Some are in prison for victimlesscrimes. So, the trial by jury and jury nullification are vital legal parts of our society. We need to

institute continuity and stability in our legal framework.

By Timothy

Our Civil Liberties

Documents

Transcript of Our Civil Liberties