Blog Archives

US Supreme Court upholds the right to carry arms in public for self defence

by the Epoch Times and Cairns News

The US Supreme Court voted 6–3 on June 23 to strike down New York state’s draconian concealed carry gun permitting system on constitutional grounds, recognizing for the first time a constitutional right to carry firearms in public for self-defense.

This judgement removes any hope of Marxist President Joe Biden and his Democrat colleagues of taking guns from law-abiding American citizens. It also has ramifications for Australia’s much maligned gun owners who have been pilloried by the ABC, Labor Party-Green junta and the Liberal Party simply for owning a firearm.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a majority opinion upholding the right of citizens to carry arms in public for self defence. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Australian courts now must take heed of the inalienable right of freemen to own and carry a firearm for their inherent right of self defence.

The ruling is a sweeping victory for Second Amendment gun ownership rights and may help to undo restrictive gun control laws outside New York state, possibly including so-called red flag laws, which allow the confiscation of guns in certain circumstances with limited due process.

The Second Amendment states: “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.”

The Supreme Court has been strengthening Second Amendment protections in recent years, and observers have said that the court’s six-member conservative supermajority could help expand gun ownership protections. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects “the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” and in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), it held that this right “is fully applicable to the States.”

The ruling comes amid rising crime rates, activist demands to defund police departments, and a Biden administration push to strengthen gun control policies. A legislative package, introduced in the wake of a series of high-profile mass shootings, is moving forward in Congress.

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association (NRA) hailed the decision, calling it a “watershed win for good men and women all across America” and taking credit for the victory after “a decades-long fight the NRA has led.”

“The right to self-defense and to defend your family and loved ones should not end at your home,” LaPierre said.

President Joe Biden condemned the new ruling, which he said “contradicts both common sense and the Constitution and should deeply trouble us all.”

“I call on Americans across the country to make their voices heard on gun safety. Lives are on the line,” Biden said.

The Empire State’s gun permit law, as with laws in seven other states, generally requires an applicant to demonstrate “proper cause” in order to obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun in public.

New York makes it a crime to possess a firearm without a license, whether inside or outside the home. An individual who wants to carry a firearm outside his home may obtain an unrestricted license to “have and carry” a concealed “pistol or revolver” if he can prove that “proper cause exists” for doing so, according to state law. An applicant satisfies the “proper cause” requirement only if he can “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community,” according to a 1980 ruling by the Supreme Court of New York in Klenosky v. New York City Police Department.

The specific issue before the court was whether the state’s denial of the petitioning individuals’ applications for concealed carry licenses for self-defense violates the U.S. Constitution.

Oral arguments in the case, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, court file 20-843, an appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, were heard on Nov. 3.

Respondent Kevin Bruen heads the New York State Police. Founded in 1871, the lead petitioner, the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, describes itself as “the state’s largest and nation’s oldest firearms advocacy organization,” and as the official NRA-affiliated state association in New York.

The majority opinion (pdf) was written by Justice Clarence Thomas, who declared that New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the 14th Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense.

“Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State’s licensing regime violates the Constitution,” Thomas wrote, before quoting Konigsberg v. State Bar of California (1961).

“In keeping with Heller, we hold that when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government … must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s ‘unqualified command.’”

It makes no sense to deny Americans the ability to defend themselves outside their homes, he said.

“To confine the right to ‘bear’ arms to the home would nullify half of the Second Amendment’s operative protections. Moreover, confining the right to ‘bear’ arms to the home would make little sense given that self-defense is ‘the central component of the [Second Amendment] right itself,’” Thomas wrote, quoting the Heller opinion.

“After all, the Second Amendment guarantees an ‘individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,’ and confrontation can surely take place outside the home. … Many Americans hazard greater danger outside the home than in it.”

In a concurring opinion, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that in 1791 when the Second Amendment was adopted, “there were no police departments, and many families lived alone on isolated farms or on the frontiers. If these people were attacked, they were on their own. It is hard to imagine the furor that would have erupted if the Federal Government and the States had tried to take away the guns that these people needed for protection. Today, unfortunately, many Americans have good reason to fear that they will be victimized if they are unable to protect themselves. And today, no less than in 1791, the Second Amendment guarantees their [rights].”

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a dissenting opinion, which Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined.

“In 2020, 45,222 Americans were killed by firearms. Since the start of this year (2022), there have been 277 reported mass shootings—an average of more than one per day. Gun violence has now surpassed motor vehicle crashes as the leading cause of death among children and adolescents. Many States have tried to address some of the dangers of gun violence just described by passing laws that limit, in various ways, who may purchase, carry, or use firearms of different kinds. The Court today severely burdens States’ efforts to do so.”

US Chief Justice John Roberts straight out of the swamp

Biden scrapes bottom of the barrel with Lady Gaga singing Stars and Stripes perhaps wearing her red human skin shoes at inauguration ceremony

by Alexandra Bruce

https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/john-roberts-jeff-epstein-and-the-plot-to-murder-scotus-justices/

At noon today, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is scheduled to swear-in Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as President and Vice President of the United States, respectively.

US Chief Justice John Roberts right out of the swamp swears in fellow swamp creature and family crime boss Creepy Joe Biden as President

 This video gives us some background about Chief Justice Roberts. It was posted on Telegram yesterday morning by superlawyer, Lin Wood in 8 parts, which I strung back together again, uploaded and transcribed, below.

 It’s an interview with a government whistleblower known as JohnHereToHelp (JHTH), in which he describes how Chief Justice Roberts adopted his children with the help of Jeffrey Epstein and then he proceeded to use his children to sexually entrap and blackmail powerful people.

 He says, “Children are often used as a commodity, a way to buy yourself into certain inner circles. And these people are all wealthy, they’re all powerful and they won’t trust you unless you’re as compromised as they are.

 “So you provide children to them. Your children, adopted children, whatever. This is how they trust you and you’re as dirty as they are. You cannot be exposed, because you can’t expose them, they can’t expose you, if everybody’s just as dirty, you know you’re safe.

 “And this is a way for them to buy your way into these inner circles, then get access to whatever. Children are the payment and the dirt and the control.”

 JHTH also details how Roberts helped with some logistics in a plot to kill several Supreme Court Justices during Hillary Clinton’s first term, so that she could then pack the Supreme Court with Globalists/Communists. She wasn’t supposed to lose.

 This FBI false flag operation was foiled when JohnHereToHelp was hired by someone at the office of the Supreme Court to infiltrate them. However, those trained and armed by the FBI to commit mass-murder fell back to a Plan B, to execute Justice Anton Scalia, who was seen as Hillary’s “greatest threat”.

TRANSCRIPT

 Interviewer: …Epstein and Supreme Court Justice Roberts initially would have met or how that relationship would have developed?

 JHTH: How they would have met. I think they met when he was under Bush, not too long after he was appointed, somewhere along there, just basically meeting powerful people, something like that.

 [Epstein] did help him with his adopted children. From what was said there and what was discussed openly in this little dirty tricks squad, the children are not genetically related but they’re raised that way, that’s more valuable to them.

 One, if not both were born in Wales but they were in the Epstein channels and they were easily removed from their version of foster care to Ireland, which has much more open adoption-type records.

 And he facilitated this for Roberts so he could adopt them both at the same time. There was a little gap but it was just paperwork and Epstein had done that for him. So, they had met, they had worked together and he was doing favors at some point.

 Interviewer: Was this something that Supreme Court Justice Roberts would have paid for? Or is this a favor exchange to Epstein, to link up with these children, or…?

 JHTH: I don’t know, at that point. It’s possible. It could have been either one. I don’t think there would have been a payment, at that point. I was for his position, there may be some type of favor. I don’t know that either was done. He facilitated it. Was there a payment? Was there a favor? I can’t say.

 Interviewer: Can you go into any more details on Supreme Court Justice Roberts with these children and the circles that he ran in, as far as you’re aware?

 JHTH: Children are often used as a commodity, a way to buy yourself into certain inner circles. And these people are all wealthy, they’re all powerful and they won’t trust you unless you’re as compromised as they are.

 So you provide children to them. Your children, adopted children, whatever. This is how they trust you and you’re as dirty as they are. You cannot be exposed, because you can’t expose them, they can’t expose you, if everybody’s just as dirty, you know you’re safe.

 And this is a way for them to buy your way into these inner circles, then get access to whatever. Children are the payment and the dirt and the control.

 Interviewer: Now, who else would we want to talk to or is there any additional documentation that we can pursue to solidify what you’re saying here today?

 JHTH: The FBI has copies of the videos from the FISA surveillance. It was discussed but I can’t prove it that Roberts had a copy. Rod Rosenstein certainly has a copy. Sean Henry of CrowdStrike, who was FBI at the time, he took two copies back to the FBI with him.

 The copies were made and then, it was actually Sean Bridges who encrypted them and gave them the keys. So there are copies out there.

 Interviewer: And who would be on these tapes, most likely? As far as from your conversations in the trick squad?

 JHTH: From just those tapes and talking about the copies? Those would be Roberts – excuse me – those would be Pence and his two lovers and the younger ones. There were also – they would do the same thing; illegal surveillance or sometimes FISA but this was mostly in the country. Illegal surveillance with Roberts’ children – and whoever they were with.

 They’d set it up. They knew that they weren’t going to be exposed, because these were Chief Justice Roberts’ children. And please keep in mind that these children have been abused since birth and I don’t want anything else happening. They’ve already lived through Hell, they don’t need anything else.

 They were, again, loaned-out for these different groups and they did surveil many of them.

 Interviewer: Now, you also have said, in past discussions that there was a plot that Roberts was allegedly a part of, where they discussed murdering other judges on the Supreme Court under a Hillary Clinton administration, can you give me any details on that?

 JHTH: This was something the FBI set up, under their guidance from their political people. It was going to be a false flag. This was going out 2 years, almost before the election. And it was a Sovereign Citizen group. Obama did not want any terrorism unless it was white terrorism. So, this was a Sovereign Citizen group that the FBI had infiltrated and armed and instigated against other targets.

 They were, for the most part pro-America but they were racist in some of their origins. A lot of them were divorced fathers with a grudge against the court system, anyway and the FBI people had infiltrated and exploited this.

 They moved them up to the level of assassinating Federal judges, political people, things like that. You want the names? I can tell you.

 So, anyway, part of their plot was various types of attacks on the Supreme Court, to take out as many judges as they could and Roberts was aware of this. He actually provided some scheduling, because apparently, the justices are not all there at one time, they come and go as they please – and, “These three will be working something and these three…” and he provided this to the group, so they could finalize their plans.

 They were very, very close in what they were trying to do. They had explosives, all types of automatic weapons, they had rocket launchers and they were very close to it.

 They were going to assassinate F Dennis Saylor, he’s a Federal Judge in Massachusetts and Martha Coakley and Lisa Monaco and her family. They were going to make it look like a home invasion and film it until later, when they needed it.

 And this was their initial attack plan and then, the Supreme Court got infiltrated, at their request. And when I found out what they were doing, that they were going to attack these judges and they were going to pack the Supreme Court, I tried to end-run them.

 I had minders, people kept tabs on me. I had FBI minders but I tried to end-run and expose it and I took all the evidence, I went to Homeland Security, who were overwhelmed and they called in the FBI and then the DOJ, which came right back on me and they picked me up just a few weeks later, when they found out who I was.

 And the damage to their plots had been done. They did get close to assassinating people up there. Lisa Monaco, the judge was under 24/7 security, Martha Coakley had in-state security and I did prevent them from going after the Supreme Court, although their plans were all out, they had maps, they had the weapons, they had everything planned, so at least it prevented something like that.

 Interviewer: Now, were the teams who supposed to do the actual operations against the judges, were those Americans or were they foreign?

 JHTH: No, these were Americans. A third would be these Sovereignty groups and two thirds would be FBI people or people working with the FBI.

 They were going to get rid of them, anyway. They actually have recordings of their planning over the phone – me, as part of this group – and then, they did not hang up the phone – they did not kill the phone and we were listening to them talking about killing me and my wife. Things like that.

 Another time, they actually butt-dialed me and he was talking about – he was on the phone talking to various people – about their plans, about Hillary going after her and what they were going to do to us because we new too much and were outside, at the time.

 So, they could not do what they wanted, we got the people under surveillance, we saved them. As a credit for saving them, they were very upset that their plans had gone to crap, very upset with me, especially when they came and picked me up. But it stopped it. Their plans were written-out, they were like, they had maps, they had surveillance, they had quite a but of equipment.

 Interviewer: What was the timeline they were hoping to do this in?

 JHTH: This would be right after – within the first year of a Hillary Clinton’s presidency. She was not supposed to lose. So, this was all planned-up and it was more than just that. It was a twofold. They wanted to pack the court, they wanted to take out as many as they could. Roberts was actually helping, because he didn’t want to be one of them and he wanted some choice in who would be on the bench after that. He wanted to maintain some form of control, so he did provide information.

 But it was supposed to be done within the first year of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, so that they could ban firearms, as well. And pack the Court. So, they had plenty of time to do that. That was their two main goals.

 Interviewer: Do you believe the death of Anton Scalia was part of this same plot or is that – do you know if that was separate?

 JHTH: It was the same people. He was a backup plan. He was their biggest threat; being the most Conservative justice.

 Justice Scalia, actually, I believe he found out about this; the plans and he went to the White House, like a week before his death. I believe he found out what they were trying to do.

 When they moved away from the overall attack, of where these people lived or making an attack over the holidays, when more than one justice would be in their home, things like this – and again, Roberts was providing this.

 They had to take him out. He was seen as their biggest obstacle. So, the same basic group that was involved were given access to the ranch where he was found.

 They talked about how they did it, they had a couple different options but it was discussed prior to his death; what they intended to do, where they could possibly do it, how they could do it, who they would need.

 The records are there, at the Cibolo Ranch, one person was brought in – it was three men – one person was brought in as a tent worker the other two – same team – were brought in as servants from a group that was there hunting.

 And they discussed how it was done. They used DMSO, dimethyl sulfoxide, which is a fairly inert chemical, just goes through your skin. But if you mixed it with a poison or a drug or something like that, it will go directly into your system and overload you. I believe that’s why he was found with a pillow over his face. He was struggling to breathe. He couldn’t breathe, he was choking.

 And this particular chemical, you can tailor it to the person. If they have a drug problem, you can put fentanyl in it and overdose them. If they have a heart condition, it would take very little to go directly in, it would be like a direct injection into the heart.

 And then, they talked about how they did it and Roberts was on the phone, discussing the successor. And he wanted a say in it, because now, it was only going to be one person and he wanted to pick that person and he wanted a say in who was going to take it – and of course, there was all kinds of talk about Eric Holder taking it and all kinds of people. But he wanted a say in who was going to take over Justice Scalia’s spot.

 And I don’t think he got it. I mean, obviously, he can’t, because President Trump is here. But he did want it and this is all prior to discussions and him complaining that he wasn’t getting any say prior to his death. His sudden death. It was well-known.

 Interviewer: Aside from Roberts being witting on this, did Rosenstein or anyone outside of the White House, had they been made aware of the plans, perhaps in Hillary’s camp that you could speak about?

JHTH: Oh, Hillary was one who knew about it, it was supposed to be done under her watch, her first term, so that they could pack the Court. They were fully aware of it.

 Rod has an intense hatred of Hillary, even though he worked with her when he had to. He’s not fond of Obama, really. He’s only fond of himself.

 But the plan was to be enacted through them and [Rod Rosenstein] was integral in running the Hammer system through Baltimore…

%d bloggers like this: