My old friend Attorney Andrew Branca is the author of “Law of Self-Defense,” which I strongly recommend that you read, and also stars in an excellent regular YouTube channel of the same title.It’s worth a few minutes of your time to watch him here:
He gives multiple examples of clear-cut self-defense shootings that turned into something else entirely by the time they hit the TV news screen or the front page.
In fairness to the journalists, they can only report what they can find. If the only voice for your side is silent – an old-school attorney who says “I don’t discuss my cases in the press” – the only the false narrative gets heard in the Court of Public Opinion. The “don’t discuss cases in the press” policy only works when both sides abide by the treaty.
The “don’t discuss cases in the press” policy only works when both sides abide by the treaty.
Yeah, don’t count on the authorities to stick to, “We don’t comment on active investigations.” If the brass or DA/AG has an anti-CCW agenda, you’ll quickly find that “somebody” WILL, in fact, comment — or “anonymously leak” details — to the press on YOUR active investigation if they can crucify you in the court of public opinion to try and get an easy win. And don’t expect that anyone will investigate the violation of the “no comment” policy.
The mainstream media, of course, has a well-documented anti-CCW bent and will gleefully air and publish anything they get that paints you in a bad light. OTOH, if your police department is honest and says nothing bad about you or your actions, expect the MSM to just bury the story.
Trust the advice of your attorney, but at the same time, don’t underestimate the court of public opinion or the value of getting your version of events out there.
(Off-topic: Isn’t it interesting how during Antifa/BLM riots sparked by a police officer shooting in self-defense, the MSM can’t say anything nice about the police — but when reporting on a citizen shooting in self-defense, the police narrative may as well be Gospel from On High? While it sounds like a double-standard, they’re actually very consistent: they’re pro-criminal and opposed to self-defense.)
The more I learn the more I see the “law” of self-defense more as the “art” of self defence. Thanks for another referral in my continued education.
Such an important message.
And NOT CAPTIONED!
You miss us deaf shooters Mas.
George
I’m sorry, George, but I didn’t make that video.
There’s a little “CC” button at the right bottom of the video, visible if you hover your cursor over it.
Alternatively, click the YouTube icon to open the video in YouTube, click “more” below it, go down and find the “Transcript” button and get a transcript.
Attorney Andrew Branca puts out a lot of good information about self-defense and the 2nd Amendment. Right now, he is highlighting a law review article, from 2008, that gives some very interesting facts and background information about the Supreme Court U.S. Vs. Miller decision from 1939.
It turns out that the Miller decision was or orchestrated by the Machiavellian American Left and the FDR Administration. It was designed to be a perfect “test case” which would provide Constitutional protection to their insidious National Firearms Act of 1934. The Act that first created the oppressive NFA system that we all suffer under today.
I have been writing, for a long time in this blog, that the American Left has been engineering the downfall of the United States of America, as a Constitutional Republic, for over a century now. This is one more piece of evidence that confirms me in my conviction.
If you have the time, it would be good to read this law review article from 2008. It provides a window into the hideous mindset of the Firearms-Prohibitionists. Here is a link to a PDF version of the article:
https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1263&context=law_facpub
I found this bit interesting:
Miller and Layton ended up in Fort Smith, Arkansas, where United States Attorney for the Western District of Arkansas Clinton R. Barry charged them with violating the National Firearms Act. Barry knew all about Miller, as he had attended the O’Malley trials and seen Miller testify. Barry was eager to ensure the government could prove an NFA violation. It is “[e]xtremely important this case be investigated by competent federal officers quickly before these parties released on bond to prove possession this weapon in Oklahoma immediately before arrest in Arkansas to show transportation.” The United States Attorney’s office forwarded Barry’s request to the F.B.I. for investigation. [citations removed, bold emphasis mine]
In those days, the U.S. Attorneys understood that because the NFA was passed under the authority of Congress to “regulate interstate commerce” — a.k.a. the “Commerce Clause” — their best bet to secure a conviction required them to prove that an NFA firearm crossed state lines.
IOW, if it’s owned and possessed in only one State, it is not part of “interstate commerce” and cannot be regulated by Congress.
They ignore that requirement now, ever since Wickard v. Filburn in 1942 held that even items produced and used only in one State nevertheless affect interstate commerce because then the owner does not need to purchase them from out-of-state, and so in-state-only items — which never enter interstate commerce — can be regulated by Congress under the Commerce Clause.
On one hand, to me that’s another strike against Wickard v. Filburn, and evidence that it’s a terrible precedent. On the other hand, it’s interesting how prosecutors’ understanding of the Constitution and how their job fits into its requirements have changed over time.
@ Archer – “…can be regulated by Congress under the Commerce Clause.”
You are very correct. The power of the Commerce Clause has been greatly expanded, by the desires of the American Left, so as to shift power away from the States and hand it to the Federal Government. A significant portion of the Left’s attack, on the American Republic System, has been their attack upon Federalism. Their constant effort to concentrate power in the Central Government.
That is what Leftists do, of course. It is what they believe. A Leftists, by definition, is a Statist that holds that ALL POWER must be concentrated into a central “Super Government”. This is because they believe that only such a “Super Government” will be powerful enough to create the conditions for the “Left-Wing Utopia” to form.
So, yes, the oppressive NFA system stands upon two pillars. One is, as you note, upon expanded Commerce Clause powers. The other pillar is the “Tax and Spend” power granted to Congress.
Technically, the NFA is a “Tax” upon certain firearms. The $200 NFA fee is still called the “Tax Stamp” even today. However, it was all an open lie even when the NFA was created. Since it has not been adjusted for inflation, the $200 NFA fee does not seem too bad today. However, it was an outrageous fee in 1934 when the National Firearms Act was created.
Why do I call it a lie? Because the true purpose of a tax is to raise revenue. In actual fact, the NFA never did raise any revenue. I would bet that the revenue raised, annually, by the NFA has never (once) covered the operating expenses required to administer the program.
In other words, I’ll bet that the NFA has always produced a negative cash flow for the Government. This fact, alone, shows that the purpose was never to raise revenue and, therefore, to label it as a “Tax” is yet another bald-faced lie from the American Left. This one dating back to the FDR Administration.
No, the Tax authority of congress has always been a cloak. The true purpose of the NFA was firearms-prohibition. The true purpose has always been an attack upon the 2nd Amendment Rights of the American People.
I am truly astounded at how willfully blind the American People seem. The American Left, AKA the Democrat Party, has been lying to the American People for over a century. I just pointed out one of their lies from 1934.
They have been scheming to destroy the American Republic since, literally, the creation of their oppressive Political Party in 1828. Yet, there are many who still profess to believe in the Democrat Party. Many who will, blindly, vote for any candidate with a “D” after their name on the ballot.
A vote for a Democrat is a vote against America. It has always been so. Yet, the Democrats employ camouflage so skillful, they hoodwink their useful idiots so completely, that they never lack for victims upon which to practice their deceptions!
The stupidity and folly of the human species sometimes passes all understanding!
well, to compliment the MAG training, i would suggest you get into one of Branca’s classes too. a combination of the knowledge AND the handwritten notes will serve you well should you ever have to try and qualify for self defense immunity. if you can’t attend his class, as Mas said, the information in the book unwittingly cross references the MAG information.
Epstein didn’t kill himself!
The media has always gone with whatever information they might have as press/air time approaches. As for “facts”, well that’s where those corrections buried in the back pages come in. Very occasionally, corrections will happen in later on-air presentations-but that word won’t be mentioned.
But that’s for stories that aren’t agenda-and/or sensation-driven. As an example, the altered audio of Zimmerman’s phone report to the LLEA on the suspicious character. Yeah, they fired the folks responsible-after they got caught. Never let facts get in the way of a good story and ratings.
It’s why it’s so important to have your ducks in a row when talking to the LLEA. After you do that and make your official statement DON’T TALK ABOUT IT WITH ANYONE UNTIL THE CASE IS RESOLVED! Keeping your mouth shut afterward isn’t a bad idea either.
If you’re unfortunate enough to generate a headline type case, the other side will have media experts. That’s what your attorney’s for.
Shouldn’t crime be an issue upon which all law-abiding people agree? Shouldn’t Democrats, Republicans, the media and the government all support heroes and victims, and condemn criminals? Seems simple enough.
The fact that victims who defend themselves with firearms should have to twist themselves into knots, and pay a lot for attorneys, and follow complex scripts to avoid losing in court, shows that our government is the enemy of the people. How bizarre is it that anyone would favor a society-destroying criminal over a tax paying, law-abiding citizen?
A benevolent government would encourage citizens to arm themselves, and train. It would defend victims, celebrate heroes, and execute violent criminals.
@ Roger Willco – “A benevolent government would encourage citizens to arm themselves, and train.”
Quote of the Day:
“Some princes, so as to hold securely the state, have disarmed their subjects; others have kept their subject towns distracted by factions; others have fostered enmities against themselves; others have laid themselves out to gain over those whom they distrusted in the beginning of their governments; some have built fortresses; some have overthrown and destroyed them. And although one cannot give a final judgment on all of these things unless one possesses the particulars of those states in which a decision has to be made, nevertheless I will speak as comprehensively as the matter of itself will admit.
There never was a new prince who has disarmed his subjects; rather when he has found them disarmed he has always armed them, because, by arming them, those arms become yours, those men who were distrusted become faithful, and those who were faithful are kept so, and your subjects become your adherents. And whereas all subjects cannot be armed, yet when those whom you do arm are benefited, the others can be handled more freely, and this difference in their treatment, which they quite understand, makes the former your dependents, and the latter, considering it to be necessary that those who have the most danger and service should have the most reward, excuse you. But when you disarm them, you at once offend them by showing that you distrust them, either for cowardice or for want of loyalty, and either of these opinions breeds hatred against you.” – From ‘The Prince’ by Nicolo Machiavelli
The writings of Machiavelli are a most appropriate subject to study if one wishes to understand the actions of the Left/Globalist Elites who have assumed control over North America and Europe. If you carefully read the quote above, it will provide the answers that you seek.
As indicated in the first paragraph, a Government that wishes to subjugate an unwilling population will attempt to (a) disarm the People (AKA Firearms-Prohibition), (b) divide the population into factions and set them against each other (AKA, the racism, homophobia, sexism, climate-change, woke agenda), (c) encourage external enemies to build up as threats (AKA Russia, Russia, Russia, china, Islam, etc.), and (d) set out to control internal dissent (AKA FBI, NSA, CIA, Big Media, Big Tech, suppression of opposing view, propaganda, indoctrination, etc.).
Paragraph 2, in contrast, is what a wise Prince does (Arm the People) if he wants them to be his willing supporters rather than his unwilling slaves.
It is as clear as daylight that the current Washington regime has taken the path of enforced slavery rather than trying to win willing supporters.
Paragraph No. 1 indicates what one does when one is trying to conquer and subjugate a People that you see as your enemies.
It is just a thought but, if our Government sees the American People as an enemy population to be disarmed and conquered, should we not also view then as a hostile enemy that is fostering an invasion of our homeland?
In summary, Roger, current events and the actions of the Left/Global Elites are not strange or puzzling at all. Machiavelli, if he were still alive, would recognize these actions in an instant.
These actions are only puzzling if one’s mind is still locked in an obsolete mindset that is trying (unaccountably) to see these people as Americans instead of seeing them (properly) as foreign invaders and/or traitors to the United States of America.
Public Enemy Number One is not Russia, nor China, nor Jihadists. Public Enemy Number One is Democrats. Not all Democrats hate America, but their votes support the Democrat Party, which does hate America, and their policies weaken America.
Comments are closed.