The original meaning of 'outlaw' was someone who has been thrown out of the law's protection. He is outside the law, so anyone could do whatever they wanted to them.
This is exactly why I both respect and consider fools, of the freemen on the land.
Sure you don't have to beholden to laws, but you're still in a country that follows those laws. They should really consider themselves lucky that even though they don't follow the laws when they're arrested they're still afforded rights to those laws even if they don't believe in them.
An outlaw ruling would soon have them be in the receiving end sharpish.
On a side note where / how do human rights interact with outlaws?
A man alone on a island will enjoy all his rights, since there is no one there to stop him. Everyone is ultimately responsible for protecting their own rights, doubly so when the king has rescinded his protection. The sheriff's original job was protecting criminals from the mob until justice could be seen.
When Thomas Jefferson recognized that the Alien & Sedition Act was an unconstitutional violation of the 1st Amendment, he didn't go around passing new laws. He didn't try and take it to the Supreme Court to try and rule in his favor. He didn't even rescind the law. He just refused to prosecute anyone under it, and pardoned everyone convicted under it. It was a hot-button political issue of the day until a Democratic-Republican Congress finally upended the Federalist horseshit.
If governors pledged to pardon people who "defended their lives, family, friends, property, and community from Marxist lynchings", the insurrection would end fairly soon.
Marxists talk a big game about "using the power of the people", but when the revolution comes, the people normally betray them because they don't actually represent the people. In fact, the people tend to stand firmly against Leftists. Leftists can only succeed by parasitizing institutions and controlling keystone positions of power. The only correct way to defeat them is to decentralize power to the individual and let the problem sort itself out. This is what a mass pardon pledge would do.
This is the best and most thorough statement of the whole affair of executive custodianship of prosecution. The prosecutorial climate shapes all of society. Jefferson knew that!
The way I see it, the executive custodianship of prosecution can either shift responsibility to the judiciary by carrying it out, or shift responsibility to the legislature by not carrying it out.
Every single political problem facing the US could be solved by a single order, in a single day:
"No American shall be prosecuted for actions that otherwise would be crimes, were they committed against someone not a marxist terrorist."
BOOM
The original meaning of 'outlaw' was someone who has been thrown out of the law's protection. He is outside the law, so anyone could do whatever they wanted to them.
This is exactly why I both respect and consider fools, of the freemen on the land.
Sure you don't have to beholden to laws, but you're still in a country that follows those laws. They should really consider themselves lucky that even though they don't follow the laws when they're arrested they're still afforded rights to those laws even if they don't believe in them.
An outlaw ruling would soon have them be in the receiving end sharpish.
On a side note where / how do human rights interact with outlaws?
A man alone on a island will enjoy all his rights, since there is no one there to stop him. Everyone is ultimately responsible for protecting their own rights, doubly so when the king has rescinded his protection. The sheriff's original job was protecting criminals from the mob until justice could be seen.
"If you want human rights - behave like a human"
Yeah I'd want to actually restrict that to shooting, now that I think about it. But the gist is right.
When Thomas Jefferson recognized that the Alien & Sedition Act was an unconstitutional violation of the 1st Amendment, he didn't go around passing new laws. He didn't try and take it to the Supreme Court to try and rule in his favor. He didn't even rescind the law. He just refused to prosecute anyone under it, and pardoned everyone convicted under it. It was a hot-button political issue of the day until a Democratic-Republican Congress finally upended the Federalist horseshit.
If governors pledged to pardon people who "defended their lives, family, friends, property, and community from Marxist lynchings", the insurrection would end fairly soon.
Marxists talk a big game about "using the power of the people", but when the revolution comes, the people normally betray them because they don't actually represent the people. In fact, the people tend to stand firmly against Leftists. Leftists can only succeed by parasitizing institutions and controlling keystone positions of power. The only correct way to defeat them is to decentralize power to the individual and let the problem sort itself out. This is what a mass pardon pledge would do.
This is the best and most thorough statement of the whole affair of executive custodianship of prosecution. The prosecutorial climate shapes all of society. Jefferson knew that!
Share this!
Thanks, I try.
The way I see it, the executive custodianship of prosecution can either shift responsibility to the judiciary by carrying it out, or shift responsibility to the legislature by not carrying it out.