​​

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION​

(1ST AMENDMENT)

​

​Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

​​​​​

WHAT DO YOU CALL A GUY WHO USED HIS NEWS PLATFORM DURING A NATIONAL STATE OF EMERGENCY TO INCITE THE DESTRUCTION OF PEOPLE'S PROPERTY AND LIVELIHOODS... WHO HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DEATH OF GEORGE FLOYD?

​

HOW ABOUT...EVIL MOTHER FUCKER?

​

​​​

WOULD THIS ASSHOLE BE OK WITH AN ANGRY MOB SHOWING UP TO HIS HOUSE AND BURNING IT TO THE GROUND BECAUSE OF GEORGE FLOYD, SINCE HE IS A WHITE PRIVILEGED ASSHOLE WHO GETS PAID MILLIONS BY THE VERY SAME SYSTEM HE IS KNOCKING?

​

NIGGA PLEASE!... FREDO...SHUT THE FUCK UP!

​

BY THE WAY, IF YOUR BUSINESS GOT DESTROYED WHILE THIS EVIL ASSHOLE WAS ON THE AIR INCITING THE DESTRUCTION IT?

​

YOU CAN SUE HIM AND CNN, BECAUSE THEY ARE LIABLE!

​

"The right of the people peaceably to assemble,"

​

​LET'S NOW TALK ABOUT WHY WE ONLY HAVE THE "RIGHT TO PEACEABLE PROTEST" ONLY THE GOVERNMENT"... AND NOT "THE PEOPLE!"

​​

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

​​​

WHAT IF YOU ARE WRONG ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE PROTESTING ABOUT?

​

OTHERWISE, YOU ARE NOT A JURY, JUDGE, OR EXECUTIONER.

 

AND BECAUSE YOUR POLITICAL POINT OF VIEW IS YOUR OPINION, IF EVERYONE IS ALLOWED TO PROTEST EVERY OTHER APPOSING POLITICAL POINT OF VIEW, WE WILL FIND OURSELVES LIVING IN A CONSTANT STATE OF CHAOS.

​

HOW CAN WE THE PEOPLE "INSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY" IF EVERYONE IS ALLOWED TO PROTEST PEOPLE AND BUSINESS WHO ARE NOT BREAKING THE LAW OR BECAUSE THEY DON'T AGREE WITH SOMEONE ELSES RELIGIOUS OR POLITICAL POINT A VIEWS?

 

AND DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE "INSURE" MEANS?

 

Dictionary

Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more

in·sure

/inˈSHo͝or/

 

verb

1. ​

   arrange for compensation in the event of damage to or loss of (property), or injury to or the death of (someone), in exchange for regular advance payments to a company or government agency.​

2. secure or protect someone against (a possible contingency).

   "by appeasing Celia they might insure themselves against further misfortune"

 

​

IT MEANS THE GOVERNMENT, ITS LAWS AND THE COURTS CAN ONLY "INSURE WE THE PEOPLES DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY," OTHERWISE THEY ARE OPERATING IN CONTEMPT OF THE CONSTITUTION.

 

THAT IS WHY ALL THE POWERS THAT'S BEEN ALLOTTED TO THESE THREE  SEPARATE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT(LEGISLATIVE, JUDICIAL & EXECUTIVE) BY THE CONSTITUTION CAN ONLY OPERATE WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THESE INALIENABLE RIGHTS.

​

THAT IS WHY WHEN THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION WAS ORIGINALLY DRAFTED AND RATIFIED, IT WAS DONE SO WITHOUT A BILL OF RIGHTS, BECAUSE IT ALREADY HAD ONE:

​

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

 

LET'S TALK ABOUT IT!

​

THIS MEANS THAT WHEN IT COMES TO THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, THE ONLY POWERS CONGRESS OR THE STATES HAVE IS "PROVIDING" FOR THE COMMON DEFNSE.

​

THIS MEANS, CONGRESS AND THE STATES GOVERNMENTS ONLY HAVE POWER TO GIVE US GUNS, NOT TAKE THEM AWAY. 

​​

​

THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

(AMENDMENT 2)

​

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

SO NOT ONLY CAN'T THE GOVERNMENT PASS ANY LAWS WHICH WILL INFRINGE ON THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO AUTHORITY IN THE POWERS THAT BEEN ALLOTTED TO THE LEGISLATIVE, JUDICIAL OR EXECUTIVE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT FOR THEM TO PASS ANY SUCH LAWS.

 

FOR EXAMPLE, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE POWERS OF CONGRESS:

​

THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

(ARTILE 1. SECTION 8.)

 

POWERS OF CONGRESS:

​

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

 

 

BUT WHY WERE NONE OF THE 3 BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT GIVEN POWER TO REGULATE THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS?

​

CAN A LEGISLATURE, JUDGE OR PRESIDENT RESURRECT THE DEAD?

​

AND THAT IS WHY YOU CANNOT SUE THE POLICE FOR NOT COMING TO YOUR RESCUE AS AN INDIVIDUAL:

 

​

THE PUBLIC DUTY DOCTRINE?

​

The public duty doctrine is a legal principle that states that government officials, including police officers, absent a special relationship, do not owe a specific duty of care to individual members of the public. Instead, their duty is to protect the public as a whole. This doctrine has significant implications for police officers and their interactions with members of the public.

​

One of the earliest cases to discuss the public duty doctrine is South v. Maryland (1856). In that case, the Supreme Court held that police officers did not have a duty to protect an individual from harm unless they had a special relationship with that individual. This special relationship could be established through actions such as making an arrest, placing someone in custody, or making promises of protection.

​

Another notable case that discussed the public duty doctrine is Warren v. District of Columbia (1981). In that case, the D.C. Court of Appeals held that the police did not have a specific duty to protect individuals from harm. The case involved a situation where the police had been called to a woman’s home multiple times to investigate reports of a break-in, but they did not take any significant action. The woman was later assaulted by the intruder, and she sued the police for negligence. However, the court held that the police did not have a duty to protect her specifically, as their duty was to protect the public as a whole.

​

https://savagetraininggroup.com/public-duty-doctrine-implications-police-officers/#:~:text=The%20public%20duty%20doctrine%20is,not%20take%20any%20significant%20action.

​​

​

AND NOW YOU KNOW WHY YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, BECAUSE THE POLICE ARE NOT OBLIGED TO SAVE YOU. AFTER ALL, HOW CAN YOU PROTECT YOURSELF IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE(POLICE) ELSE CARRY YOUR RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS WHO IS NOWHERE AROUND AT THE TIME OF THE CRIME?

 

​ALSO, NO WHERE IN THE POWERS OF CONGRESS IS THERE A LAW THAT ALLOWS CONGRESS TO PASS LAWS CONCERNING FREE SPEECH, EXPRESSION, RELIGION, OR THE PRESS!​​

​

AND SO, WHEN YOU SEE POLITICIANS RUNNING ON THE BASIS (FOR WHAT EVER DIABOLICAL REASONS THEY COME UP WITH) THAT THEY ARE GOING TO CONGRESS TO DO GUN CONTROL LAWS.

 

WHAT THEY ARE SAYING IS THIS: SEND MY TREASONOUS ASS TO CONGRESS SO I MIGHT TAKE AN OATH TO UPHOLD THE LAWS OF THE CONSTITUTION, BUT THEN WASTE TAX PAYERS TIME AND MONEY BY ME PUTTING TOGETHER A COALITION OF LAW MAKERS TO CREATE A FICTITIOUS LOOP HOLE "WITCH" ALLOWS US TO OPERATE OUTSIDE THE POWERS OF CONGRESS.

 

WHICH IS CALLED A CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT TREASON AGAINST EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN.

 

THERE IS NOT ONE LAW WHICH SAYS THE CONGRESS HAVE POWER TO REGULATE THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. 

 

WHO IS "PROVIDING" FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE OF WE THE PEOPLE?

​

WE THE PEOPLE ARE PROVIDING COMMON DEFENSE FOR THEMSELVES BY ESTABLISHING A GOVERNMENT TO SECURE THOSE RIGHTS TO THEMSELVES.

​

HENCE, THE GOVERNMENT HAS GUNS TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE AND THE PEOPLE HAVE GUNS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM THE GOVERNMENT AND THE PEOPLE WHO CHOSE TO VIOLATE THOSE INALIENABLE RIGHTS OF A FREE INDIVIDUAL. 

​

SUCH AS:

​

United States v. The Amistad (1841) was a landmark Supreme Court case where the Court ruled 7-1 that kidnapped Africans who revolted by taking up their inalienable right to bear arms and killed these treacherous dogs on a Spanish ship, were free individuals, not property, because their illegal transportation violated treaties against the slave trade. The ruling, argued by John Quincy Adams, favored abolitionists.

​

​​​

OK, BACK TO THE NAZIS:

 

WORLD WAR I WAS STARTED BY THE GERMANS, AND SO WAS WORLD WAR II, AND NOW WORLD WAR III. 

​

​AND SPEAKING OF SOWING DISCOURSE... LET'S TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE VERY SAME PEOPLE WHO ARE CLAIMING TO BE A MARGINALIZED COMMUNITY AND THE WORLD SHOULD CREATE A SAFE SPACE FOR THEM SO THEY WON'T COMMIT SUICIDE, IS ADVOCATING THAT IT'S OK TO MURDER PEOPLE WHO DON'T AGREE WITH THEIR POLITICAL POINT OF VIEWS.

​

FUCK YOU... GO SELF IMMOLATE!

​

JUST ONE MORE THING:

 

IF YOU ARE EASILY BOTHERED BY SEEING YOUR REPRESENTATIVES, CONGRESSMEN/WOMEN, OR GOVERNOR ( SUCH AS A.O.C,  OR GAVIN NEWSOM) HAVING SEX WITH THE DEVIL OR GIVING THEIR FIRST BORN TO THE DEVIL, YOU SHOULD NOT VIEW THIS DARK POLITICAL SATIRE AND MOCKUMENTARY.

 

IF YOU ARE EASILY BOTHERED BY SEEING YOUR FAVORITE ACTOR OR ACTRESS (ACTOR HAVE PENIS & ACRESS HAVE VAGINA!) SUCH AS MAN-HATER ROSIE O'DONNELL OR THOSE WITCHES ON THE VIEW HAVING SEXY TIME WITH LUCIFER, YOU SHOULD NOT VIEW THIS DARK POLITICAL SATIRE AND MOCKUMENTARY.

​

IF YOU ARE A WITCH THAT BELIEVES WICKED IS GOOD, DO EVERYONE A FAVOR AND IMMOLATE YOURSELF. BECAUSE YOU AND I BOTH KNOW THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GOOD WITCH. 

​​​