It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Assisted defense (one way out which even the law allows, correct?)

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 02:19 PM
Assisted defense. Consider for when you see the next person (known or unknown) threatened or harmed who cant do anything about it physically and/or legally.

It's the real needed help that should be forced for ppl set weak that are buried under definite and indefinite kinds of threats and bodily harm.

Since it's legal to defend for another (which doesnt exclude: criminals, right?, ex-convicts, right?, the physically disabled, right? or the dianosed mentally disabled, right?) why not get up and do so for ppl that the crooked beast part of the government is threatening and/or harming? I say crooked beast because human beings behaving like monsters over ppl's lives cant be looked at as being human beings in no matter what in the hell a job calls for. They are just doing their job is a load of some bull. Another topic should be about job duties or practices that should be outlawed by the ppl.

Criminals, ex-cons, and those diagnosed mentally ill are stripped of the right to bare arms. Therefore they can not properly defend themselves when facing a danger to their life or freedom. And the ones labeled mentally ill have it worst because they are stripped from being credible in their complaints against somebody that did or does them harm which they can not defend themselves against properly. Who actually wants these kinds of ppl to be not allowed to properly defend themselves one way or the other?

If the draft comes and you know they are just going to put your life in danger, can't you use self-defense? If there is any specifics in what one can do in self-defense, then you are under a life threatening deception as I speak, are you not?

Defend for plenty in some advanced way is all that's left, isn't it? To defend for another can not to be looked at as violating the law in any sense, no matter how unmoral it may seem. Stupid sheep following religion must be faithful even unto death as if that implies that defending oneself is not moral.

I defend for you, you defend for me is how it should be (specially since we're dealing with cowards that devise snares with the law working on their evil doing behalf). Even because there are sheep amongst. It takes a true person to defend even the stupidest of sheep amongst. Put the truth in ppl's minds and you could have your body or character assassinated.

You have the natural-given right to feel your life is in danger when your freedom is being taken away from you. And you have the natural-given right to do anything and everything about it. Afterall, only in the name of self-defense can you get away with any and every thing. Though, what about for another person's defense? If you had noticed, even the so-called innocent until proven guilty are given a chance to defend themself or have somebody else defend for them, but not by their own rules. Those rules put in place are jeapardizing their very life.

So understand outside the delusion that you have the natural-given right to defend another in any and every way you can says the very law. Maybe it's a small crack hardly seen in the law, but it's there for everyone brave to stand up to see. Hell, you should be able to tell someone who legally owns a gun to kill so-n-so when so-n-so is being a danger to your life, particularly when the law enforcement wont act to take the person being a danger to you off the streets. Call that assisted self-defense.

[edit on 4-2-2008 by Mabus]


log in