FOR THOSE WHO CANNOT UNDERSTAND THE AMERICAN'S RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.

 

The Massacre of twenty little children and eight adults in the ‘Sandy Nook’ primary school at Connecticut U.S.A.

Sadly, following this horrendous tragedy and the lunatic behaviour of one American individual ‘freak’ that apparently had no respect for 'life'. We, must now all endure the usual 'knee jerk' reaction of all those who want to control, or change, the, right to bear arms.

British news commentators, especially, the presenters of Sky News, today; by, the comments they made, indicate, that they do not understand this right, set out in the American constitution.

They point out, that, here in Great Britain, following the horrors of the shooting of innocent children at a school in DUNBLANE, in Scotland, gun control legislation was brought in. And, they cannot understand the American mentality why they don't do exactly the same.

Yet, the explanation is very simple:

The difference between the American's, and, the British, is that they are true CITIZENS of the country; with all the provisions of the rightful protection of LAW; Yet, the British, are not CITIZENS; in law. We are merely, "SUBJECTS", of the British Crown.

American's have a proper 'Written Constitution", and, a "Bill of Rights", and, a "Supreme Court of Law. The "Right to bear Arms" is written into that, 'Constitution'; and, the reasons why every American has the right to own a gun, is firstly to protect themselves from attack; and, secondly, to protect the 'State' and the 'Country', from ever becoming a "Totalitarian State".

As long as "The People" have the right to bear arms, Governments can never get too big for their boots. Governments, will always be fearful, of what "The People" might do.

That is why America is a DEMOCRACY. And, why, Great Britain, is not.

The British have no protection of LAW, whatsoever:

1. They have no written constitution.

2. They have no proper 'Bill of Rights' setting out the rights and responsibilities of 'Subjects'.

3. They have no "Supreme Court of Law" where it is possible to test, question, or challenge their Parliament, from within LAW.

4. Furthermore; denied all this protection of LAW; yet, rightfully, provided with the protection of the "Reigning Monarch", sitting upon the throne, who is charged with the responsibility of honouring the "Original Contract", requiring, the 'protection of the people', from the tyranny of the 'abuses' and 'prejudice' of Parliament. The, present, "Reigning Monarch", provides no protection at all.

The "Original Contract" is the unwritten contract existing in British Law betwixt King and “The People" It's concept is abundantly clear as, 'precedent', in English LAW:

"Allegiance is given to the Liege Lord for the protection of the Liege Lord"

King James the Second was removed from the throne by the CONVENTION (Parliament) in 1688, for, “Breaking the Original Contract betwixt King and People”. In, respect of the, 'Lineal Descent', (All succeeding reigning Monarchs), the CONVENTION ruled:

"The CONTRACT is as binding upon the Successor as well as it was on the Deposed, if the Successor broke the CONTRACT, he, too, can be Deposed".

ELIZABETH THE SECOND has not honoured the 'Original Contract' all the time she has occupied the throne.


AMERICAN'S, never give up your, "Right to bear Arms". It is the best protection of law, that you have.

If we British had that same right, possibly, today, we would not be governed by a 'coalition administration' masquerading as Government; that was not 'elected' by the People, at all.

 

If we British had that same right, we would not be governed by the domination of the political parties, and their, WHIPS, in Parliament; that has no 'legality' at all.

IF WE BRITISH HAD THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS; WE TOO, MIGHT ENJOY, PROPER PROTECTION OF LAW.

For as long as we remain, "Subjects of the British Crown" - wholly defenceless- we shall never enjoy that right.

Gordon J Sheppard