Dear Friends,
It seems to me, now the precedent has been set that a constitutional Right can be removed, by criminal statute, we can expect to see a full assault on them all. Via criminal law. Since anyone can have their constitutional Right to keep and bare arms removed by a complaint of criminal intent, why not the freedom to speak, freedom of association or of religion? Should those charged with wire fraud be allowed freedom of speech? How can we tolerate crackpots preaching disliked ideas, when all we need do is charge them with something, to remove that Constitutional Right? Why should any criminal have any rights? Then all the state need do is make everyone a criminal, and voila, Constitutional protections only apply to politically favored people. As the elite want.
The US Supreme Court recently ruled, all it takes to have one’s second amendment rights removed, is an allegation of domestic abuse. Not a conviction… merely and allegation. Rest assured however, that while an allegation would be sufficient to get you or I disarmed, a criminal conviction wouldn’t be enough to have an elite’s guns taken away. The hypocrites need them for self defense. Bestowing the power on all angry women to have their ex-husbands abused at the hands of the State. Now that’s progressive! Especially because, to remove someone’s firearms over an allegation, negates all Constitutional protections. The politically disfavored already have little access to protection against state abuse, and with this ruling, they’ll have none whatsoever.
This ruling shows that our Constitutional Rights are subject to allegations of intent. An ex charged with domestic abuse, who is disarmed, is being charged with the intent to do a crime… not a crime itself. Apparently, our courts are mind readers… or corrupt. Because only a mind reader can know if someone is about to commit a crime. Else are so corrupt they deny their obligations. Now this example has been set, this tactic can be used against all of our Constitutional protections. Freedom of speech could be taken away by the mere allegation of intent to misinform. How is that any different? The mere allegation of intent to do a crime is now enough to have a Constitutional Right removed, therefore, any allegation of intent will be sufficient. SCOTUS has taken us on a slippery slope wearing skis.
Why not use the same strategy on all our Constitutional Rights? That simply follows logically. How can we be safe in our person or papers… if there is an allegation we’re considering doing a swindle? That allegation alone should be sufficient, under the new rules, for government to search our premises without warrant or court order. You have to admit, that would be much more effective at law enforcement. The fact violent crimes aren’t prosecuted in many cities now, depending on who the victim is and who the attacker is… only serves to enhance the despotism. What if someone is charged with wanting to start a cult? Can their freedom of religion be taken away? Of course it can! Now that SCOTUS has negated our Constitution, as it pertains to citizens, we’ve entered a brave new world.
Constitutional protections are only for the elite and illegal aliens today. Citizens are on the outs with our courts. Today, if the police order you to self incriminate, SCOTUS stands behind them 100%. Proving our Constitution is merely pacifying prose written on friable paper. Hiding their naked despotism behind a cheesecloth of court rulings. We can fight back though. Follow the tactic they used in Scotland. Use the elite’s own despotism against them. Demand local prosecutors charge national elites with their obvious crimes, and order their weapons removed… as well as their security detail. Who are essentially a weapon. Remove their constitutional rights, and you’ll find our Constitution is important to protect after all. But only when their rights are at stake… not and never ours.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
