HomeJoinMissionAbout UsLinksActivism

What's in your Head?

By Mike Straw

From the founding of the world was it ever thus: innocents thrust by the tides of fortune into the unenviable position of judiciously protecting their own precious lives then suffered mightily at the hands of those entrusted to their erstwhile safety.

From fabled caveman days, those who survived such horrifying encounters suffered survivor guilt, always second-guessing their decisions and blaming themselves for its occurrence.

Revolutionary War soldiers witnessed the horrors wrought by the minié balls fired from their flintlock muskets and they too, suffered the lifelong pains of survivor guilt.

The paradigm changed for the better- but only for an elite group- when the “officer survival” movement in the 1970s, when the phenomenon was first identified and applied to that specific career field, funded by a demanding, bloated mercenary proxy-guardian “police” union.

When the subject of stress first began to be quantified, it was discovered that all sorts of things were happening which had long-lasting, even permanent- repercussions that had, up to this point, never previously been successfully addressed: witness General Patton’s famed slap of the “shell-shocked” soldier.

Today, stress-related phenomena are not only well-documented, but at least as well understood.

No longer is it necessary to endure undue suffering for something not your fault.

In law-enforcement, when an officer kills a mere taxpayer, the situation is casually looked over with an eye to finding a hook to pin blame on.

In its immediacy, the officer’s supervisor is ordered to treat the killer sympathetically, employing verbiage such as, “I know you would have avoided the situation if you could have, but it wasn’t your call. I have to take your weapon for ballistic testing- here, take mine.”

Very clever psychological encouragement from an authority figure minimizing the officer’s trauma.

Is this the scenario we can reassuringly expect if we ever discover ourselves in a similar position?

Any self-protection shooting constitutes a near-death experience.

Post Shooting Disorder, first defined by psychologist Doctor Walter Gorski, is rare and mild in response to natural phenomena, but when the causal factor is human in nature, the degree of trauma is more severe and long-lasting.

Post Traumatic-Shock Disorder is the number one killer of combatants.

The universal human phobia is interpersonal aggression.

Immediately after the event, you may feel revulsion, not at the act, but at the repugnant sights, sounds and odors it produces.

You may become nauseous, throw up or even faint.

You may feel remorse, not regarding the moral justification of the event, but simply a sadness or sorrow over being forced into it.

You may feel self-doubt and start to second-guess your actions.

This can proceed to the point of denial.

Rational people will eventually conclude that they had no viable choice and finally come to accept what transpired.

Lieutenant-Colonel Dave Grossman explains there are three variables which affect the extent you‘ll experience post traumatic-shock disorder:

Your individual vulnerability as you enter the threat management event,

The degree of trauma you experience during the event, and for our purposes, the most important,

The extent of self-help and social support you receive afterwards.

An extremely traumatic event occurs when, after you’ve just succeeded in remaining alive despite overwhelming odds and

1) Your primal response is one of, “That guy just tried to kill me but I’m still alive! I must have done something right! “ and

2) The “official” response to your life-preserving action is, “Get on the ground, scumbag! You’re under arrest!” and

3) The tool you just used to preserve your very life, and now have a fond regard for, is forcibly removed from you; you’re, not gently, physically restrained and handcuffed, then cruelly isolated by being tossed into a filthy cage intended for predatory criminals, with no contact with any compassionate individual who could calm and comfort you, a form of torture for the specific purpose to psychologically defeat you when you’re at your lowest emotional point, impersonally “grilling” you, thereby fostering further doubt and insidiously “planting” their version of events which your information-starved brain regurgitates and solidifies -permanently, through confabulation, so real you’ll pass a lie-detector test about it -into the “real” way it happened.

Your immediate body reactions may include: trembling, sweating, chills, hyperventilation, dizziness, jumpiness, hyperactivity, thirstiness, upset stomach, nausea, diarrhea, constant urge to urinate, sleep disturbance and nightmares.

Your long-term reaction may be a preoccupation with the event, reliving it over and over, second-guessing yourself, the feeling that you must have done something wrong, to the point where it metamorphosizes into your shadow, always with you: to experience irritability, loss of ability to function, outbreaks of rage, loss of ability to eat and sleep, tremors, sweats, nightmares, clinical depression, possibly even to the point of suicide, sexual dysfunction including impotence, flashbacks, inability to control your emotions, or other symptoms, such as survivor guilt, the “mark of Cain syndrome” (everyone knows what I’ve done), social withdrawal, ostracization, the feeling that “nobody else understands,” disorientation, confusion, inability to concentrate and exaggerated startle response; but if you’ve trained properly and mentally prepared yourself in advance with a dedicated, close-knit team of reassuring friends and relatives who understand and agree with your point of view, then your psychic cost can be lowered.

Teach them this comforting phrase from Chris Pollack: “I’m so glad you’re O. K.!”

They haven’t been here before either. They suffer from social paralysis.

They’re embarrassed and don’t know what to say, and so are afraid to say anything for fear of saying the wrong thing.

Realize that it’s not your reaction to having had to justifiably kill; it’s your reaction to having survived -it’s society’s reaction to your having justifiably killed.

You’ll live with the image of that terrible moment burned into your soul, but no one can bear the burden but you.

But you’re not going to get a union- or municipally-paid counselor to help you through this -you’re on your own.

Why isn’t there a national victim advocate system to pay the medical and legal bills of honest unorganized Militia members illegally assaulted by predatory criminals?

Why is there no “eight-hundred” number you can dial at any hour to receive the required counseling for the psychological burden this lowlife scumbag has illegally dumped on you?

Still, I believe the most outstanding immediate thought will be the combination of joy that you’re still alive and justifiable anger that this slimeball’s forced this on you.

You may be surprised or repulsed by this reaction, but you can’t control it -at the time, your upper brain function was hijacked by your mid brain -which is overjoyed you lived. It’s called survival euphoria, and you’re not the first to experience it.

Lieutenant-Colonel Dave Grossman counsels, “you’re only as sick as your secrets: pain shared is pain divided; joy shared is joy multiplied.”

Your unbreakable circle of dedicated, caring friends and relatives is vitally important to your continued mental health.

Remember, ignorance and denial have no survival value.

How do you know it’s Post Shooting Disorder?

If it causes impairment or distress in any significant facet of your life and it lasts at least a month, you have it.

For you, there’ll be no powerful ceremony, no positively-reinforcing societal ritual conferring a physical talisman bestowing confirmation to you, your beloved family, cherished friends, respected neighbors and the public that you weren’t the bad guy, that you did something good and deserving of approval, praise and adulation to their enthusiastic cheers and accompanying strains of “Fanfare for the Common Man” by Aaron Copeland.

At this time you’ll instead be reeling from the full weight of the certain knowledge that Der State holds predatory criminals in higher regard than you, since you’re now impoverished and imprisoned, and the creepy bad guy -Mister Bad Guy to you -is being represented for free by the best lawyers that the Banana-head Brady Campaign can purchase with money supplied by every Hollywood druggie/actor-singer alive and every social fascist talk show host/reporter out there -and I do mean out there.

In spite of the fact that you’re being held almost incommunicado and that nearly every word that reaches your ears is a calculated lie, you still feel guilt over winning the fight, because you’re alive and he isn’t, while simultaneously feeling elation at the exact same thought.

Seems a little insane, doesn’t it?

See the article in the July/August 2003 issue of “The ‘Police’ Marksman magazine entitled “Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.”

Due to stress, there’ll be holes in your recollection, and you’ll swear you remember things happened that never did.

This is the mental condition you’ll be in when the District Attorney, a long-time evil social fascist, assaults your story with wild and absurd conjecture that a five-year-old would never believe, but every evil social fascist Rosie - watching juror is drooling over.

He’ll send your own lawyer in to you with a plea bargain to lower the charges to something less… something that will result in less than citizenship -and a criminal record guaranteeing you’ll never carry again!

Believe me, you don’t want to become part of the probation and parole population: arrogant mercenary proxy-guardian “police,” parole, and probation officers now boldly burst into homes without search warrants as a way of life for those unfortunates subject to parole or probation, harassing and arbitrarily arresting and revoking their parole and probation for the most asinine and unconstitutional excuses.

The etymology of the word “Arrest” comes from the French word for “stop.”

Whenever predatory social fascist agents of the state brace an unorganized Militia member, stop him, and demand to see “your papers, please!” he’s been “arrested,” no matter whether he’s been “read his rights,” no matter what niceties the court may apply to the various steps of the process.

The 1980 u. S. v. Mendenhall decision stated that arrest occurs when a reasonable person feels that he’s no longer free to leave the presence questioning him, but I’m sure you’ll have no doubt of your status by that time.

A mercenary proxy-guardian “police” officer can’t seize your person [I.e. He can’t prohibit you from your coming and going] unless you’ve committed a crime-or, unless the officer has 'probable cause' to believe a crime has been, or is being, committed.

The term 'probable cause' refers to a felony [I.E., a serious crime.]

Hence, probable cause doesn’t apply to mere traffic infractions of the law, nor even criminal misdemeanors.

The burden is upon mercenary proxy-guardian “police” to explain being stopped.

Terry v. Ohio, 392 u. S. 1 [1968] was when the united States supreme court explained the circumstances under which a "stop-and-frisk" could be Constitutionally permissible.

The supreme court concluded that where a mercenary proxy-guardian “police” officer observes unusual conduct which leads the officer to reasonably conclude that criminal activity is taking place and that the person involved in that activity may be armed and dangerous the officer is entitled to conduct a limited search of the person's outer clothing specifically to discover weapons.

A “ frisk” for the sake of performing a pat-down is a violation of the united States Constitution.

The same supreme court that defines liberty as freedom of movement recently decided, in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada et al., that the “crime” of failing to identify one’s self exists, thus judicially nullifying both the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

The states of Alabama, Florida, Kansas, New York, Utah, and Wisconsin label a “Terry” stop specifically as “stop and identify.”

I hope your life was, up to this point, uneventful, because after this, you won’t believe the power brought to bear against you, not only by mercenary proxy-guardian “police” and prosecutors, but by the threat’s lawyers and the investigators he hires to dissect your entire life, stalking you, recording your movements, harassing your (soon to be former) employer and friends, subpoenaing your records: has your permit ever been revoked?

Even judge Robert Bork’s video rentals were subpoenaed during his confirmation hearings: where have you been on the Internet you don’t want the whole world to know about?

Be cautious of your relation with your attorney because: "His first duty is to the courts... not to the client," u. S. v Franks D. C. N. J. 53 F. 2d 128.

"Clients are also called ‘wards of the court’ in regard to their relationship with their attorneys," Spilker v. Hansin, 158 F. 2d 35, 58 u. S. App. D. C. 206.

“Wards of court: Infants and persons of unsound mind,” Davis Committee v. Lonny, 290 Ky. 644, 162 S. W. 2d 189, 190.

Did you get that?

An attorney’s first duty isn’t to you, and when you have an attorney you’re either considered insane or an infant!

How do you select a good attorney?

First, he must have successfully tried a minimum of twenty cases similar to yours.

Preferably, he should be a former judge. Where do you find him?

Who defends your local mercenary proxy-guardian “police” officers?

If they won’t talk, look up the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

There’s also the Second Amendment Foundation’s Attorney Referral Service at 206-454-7012 -you are a contributing member, right?

Even if, in your opinion, you did something egregious, say nothing.

Don’t say, in a fit of remorse, “If only I hadn’t left the gate open!”

At this time, you won’t be thinking clearly. It’s not you, it’s stress.

You literally won’t be reliable enough to relate even the most basic details, like, did you shoot or didn’t you?

During the Civil War, muskets were recovered that had never been fired, some having as many as a dozen minié balls in them, because when the nervous soldier put the firearm to his shoulder, he heard a loud noise, and believed it had fired, so he reloaded again.

Make no statements except to request your attorney.

Don’t engage in what might seem idle conversation.

The most innocent statement, from your point of view, can be critically damning.

What you say will determine what’s going to happen with the rest of your life, whether you end up back home with your beloved family, or spend the rest of your miserable life in a penitentiary -or worse.

Some people are garrulous, and verbally stroll into being charged and tried.

Others are argumentative and incite those in a position to deal them trouble.

Some absolutely won’t budge one inch away from the bare facts, and relate them in as incriminating detail as possible.

Don’t graciously consent to the nice mercenary proxy-guardian “policeman’s” polite request to dress in black BDUs, boonie hat, sunglasses and bloodstained trench coat, to be paraded before a “lineup” of one -you -while, just out of earshot, those same helpful officers are coaching the “witness” of their choosing, “C’mon, we don’t drag in innocent people, y’know… you’ll be doing society a favor. Help us get this nut off the street!”

You won’t pass “go,” you won’t collect two hundred dollars, and you will go straight to jail.

First, have your attorney request a habeas corpus writ. That gets you out.

Always counter-sue whoever’s charged you with every offense imaginable, from maliciously violating your civil rights under color of “authority” to arrogantly littering, in order to provide yourself legal standing in court.

You look better to a judge as an equal instead of as simply another sheep -er, defendant.

Remember, no matter how syrupy his smile, the wily interrogator is definitely not your friend.

When he puts his friendly arm around your shoulder in the best “father confessor” tradition, saying, “Hey, I would’ve done the same thing,” that won’t be played in court.

Instead, it’ll be that minute slip, that exhausted, confused thought you weakly gave voice: “Well, maybe,” that’s witnessed and recorded and entered as evidence against you in court, where, having narrowly escaped the physical battle for your precious life, you now stand an even greater chance of losing it.

Always have your attorney present before you recklessly open your big mouth -but make certain he’s the right one.

After such trauma, you’ll suffer from logorrhea: compulsive justification.

You’ll attempt to justify to yourself the awful reality you witnessed as you pulled the trigger.

You must immediately establish yourself as the defendant.

Attorney Walter MacDonald, training officer and tactical team leader of Massachusetts’ Plymouth county sheriff’s department, suggests a detailed and specific full report including this pertinent information:

An account of events leading up to the justifiable immediate legal countervailing use of force.

A precise description of the incident and reasons for employing justifiable immediate legal countervailing force.

A description of the justifiable immediate legal countervailing force used, including weapon, and the manner in which it was used: you are certified, right?

A description of any injuries suffered, treatment given, and photographs.

A list of all participants and witnesses to the incident.

Today, the best method for accomplishing this statement would be a video deposition with your attorney asking the questions.

Your first statement should be that you were the victim, and any subsequent statements must respond with the active dynamic of what the threat illegally did that precipitated the event.

Massad Ayoob astutely observes that evidence is perishable: people travel, objects disappear; by the time you get around to hiring an attorney, who finally hires a private detective to gather evidence, it may have ceased to be available, making your proffered legal position untenable.

Consider that every legal defensive tool you own will be confiscated and destroyed without compensation.

In some jurisdictions, you may be able to sue, at your expense, to get some of them back.

Anything used in court will be mutilated by evidence marks, dented and gouged from being gaily tossed around, and the bore rusted by failing to properly clean it after ballistic testing, then soaking in a damp vault.

These evil social fascists don’t like you or what you represent: a direct threat to their perceived “authority” over your miserable life.

If they can’t get you in court… How expensive a tool can you afford to lose?

Items and records not pertinent to your case will be seized, “lost,” and destroyed.

It wasn’t until Timothy McVeigh was about to be executed that the thousands of pages of “ missing” FBI documents mysteriously surfaced, or those subpoenaed Whitewater files that appeared outside Hillary’s office two years later.

They’ll be used against you.

That unsolicited porn that showed up on your computer, the hate mail propaganda from Aryan Nations that arrived unrequested in your mail: if you didn’t get rid of that stuff before the search, you’ll be hearing about it after.

That joke sign you received as a gift that you put on the closet door saying, “Anyone found here tonight will be found here tomorrow morning” will be enlarged to make a full-color four-foot by eight-foot display at your trial, as will be your booking photo showing you wearing that cute novelty T-shirt with the grinning skull reading, “Kill ‘em all, let God sort ‘em out.”

It’ll be introduced as prima fascia evidence to convince the carefully-selected sheep of your dangerous predisposition to behave in a violent and antisocial manner: obviously, we can’t allow his kind to simply roam the public streets, can we?

Your house and your vehicles will be inaccessible to you, as well as all that’s in them, due to the “crime scene“ yellow tape prominently displayed for the disinformation media and all your evil social fascist neighbors to see, live on the six o’clock news.

Your permit will be revoked, and even if you’re found not guilty, plan on having to re-apply -and pay -all over again.

Oh, yes: remember that question that asks, “Has your permit ever been revoked…”

Before trial, you’ll first have to survive jail.

I don’t mean that you’re going to die of AIDS after three hundred pound Bubba decides to make you his bride, that comes later, I mean those same nice officers who first brought you to the party.

On November twenty-sixth 1997, thirty-three year old Mark Philyaw was in Los Angeles California County Twin Towers jail for some traffic tickets but was expected to be released in time to spend Thanksgiving (the following day) with his family.

The sheriff’s department claimed he died after a “physical altercation” that occurred when he refused to comply with a strip search.

He was beaten to death by at least seven deputies, who viciously struck, kicked and choked him.

He was naked at the time because he was in a strip-search area.

When ordered to bend over, Mark told the deputies that he couldn’t because of a painful torn ligament in his leg; according to other prisoners who witnessed the fatal beating, one deputy said “well you want me to help you...” and then initiated the assault.

Mark’s windpipe was crushed and asphyxiation was listed as the official cause of death.

The sheriffs attempted to claim that Mark was in jail for “assault on an officer” when in fact it was merely for a suspended license.

They claimed he refused to comply with a strip search when, in fact, he just physically couldn’t.

They claimed only three deputies were involved in the illegal beating and later reluctantly admitted to seven.

A deputy supposedly investigating the murder said, “There is nothing to indicate that the deputies did anything other than their jobs.”

No mercenary proxy-guardian “police” were even suspended for the murder of Mark Philyaw, or for twenty-five-year-old Fernando Herrera Junior, who, on July eighteenth 1996 in Oxnard California, died of asphyxiation because six burly mercenary proxy-guardian “police” happily sat on his back while he was handcuffed.

On May tenth 1996 in Los Angeles California, forty-year-old Hong Chul had been making a lot of noise at a downtown corner, banging on signs, yelling, running into the street.

When mercenary proxy-guardian “police” arrived, they swarmed him, and one mercenary proxy-guardian “policeman” put his knee on his neck for four to five minutes.

“You killed him,” an outraged onlooker shouted helplessly to the smiling mercenary proxy-guardian “police.”

The cunning mercenary proxy-guardian “police” later claimed he died of “natural causes.”

You may have been missed by the threat that illegally attempted to kill you, but you can bet your liberty that his lawyer won’t miss.

You may only be arraigned before a trial, or your lawyer may be able to procure a probable cause hearing, but with the entire evil social fascist universe clamoring vociferously and continuously for your blood, count on at least one trial, and an unfair one at that.

The reprehensible social fascist double standard encourages the introduction of any lie, allegation or absurd generality regarding patriots to be effectively used against you and believed by so-called “impartial” jurors, while limiting you to only what can be proven.

You’ll be charged with a felony, that is, a serious crime.

You probably won’t be charged with murder - they might lose.

Instead , you’ll probably be charged with something an ignorant social fascist jury will blindly swallow - negligent manslaughter, and the evil social fascist prosecutor and mercenary proxy-guardian “police” investigators will suppress, manufacture and distort “facts” to fit.

You haven’t received any psychological counseling for good reason -for the prosecution.

Instead of working through the psychological trauma, they want you to associate those events -so when you’re put on the stand, you’ll flash back, and exhibit the exact same physical symptoms: the sweating, tremors, nervousness, et cetera which the evil social fascist jury, with lupine smiles, will happily interpret as your obvious guilt!

Remember, your primary civil right is the inalienable, universally recognized right to self-protection: it derives from God, not Man.

The law understands that there are infinite shades between the black and white of the statute book.

It’s your job to see to it the jury understands, particularly the part nobody -purposely -told them: their right of jury nullification.

Under English Common Law, a London jury refused to convict William Penn for violating an immoral malum prohibitum law against preaching an arbitrarily “unlawful” religion (the Quaker sect).

In one of the most famous Colonial cases on freedom of the press, jurors acquitted newspaper editor John Zenger, who was accused of seditious libel for printing truthful criticisms of the governor of New York.

The court had the audacity to tell the jury that “truth is no defense.”

Thomas Jefferson warned, “To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all Constitutional questions, is very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”

In 1804, supreme court justice Samuel Chase was impeached for denying a jury’s right to judge law -the only supreme court justice ever to be removed for cause.

John Jay, the first supreme court chief justice, reaffirmed the common law principle that jurors have a right “to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy.”

John Adams agreed when he intoned, “It is not only his right, but his duty... to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.”

Supreme court justice Harlan Stone declared, “The law itself is on trial quite as much as the cause which is to be decided.”

Massad Ayoob defines a jury as both “a twelve-headed creature with an I. Q. of at least twelve-hundred and as much as five-hundred years of experience, with twelve simultaneous bullshit detectors in operation,” and “the first twelve people empanelled to determine who has the best lawyer.”

Their narrow experience, pinkly-colored by a lifetime of evil social fascist extremist victim disarmament propaganda, will adversely impact how they view your legal and justifiable actions.

You allege that you employed your legal defensive firearm only in justifiable immediate self-protection.

How dare you?

They’ve been constantly harped on, nagged at, and seriously believe, that in vindictive Sarah’s paradise, a “police” state like ours, nobody should have a legal defensive firearm -only those with criminal intent possess them.

What, in their eyes, does that make you?

You reasonably took cover before justifiably protecting the lives of your beloved family?

You ”laid in wait in a premeditated manner.”

You didn’t give warning, recklessly abandoning your tactical surprise, before justly firing?

You “showed a callous disregard for human life.”

You righteously killed a predatory criminal to protect your precious family’s life?

You murdered him.

You managed to shoot him in the head? You coldly executed him.

You had night sights?

You must be a ninja, Rambo, obsessed about killing, fixated on death!

A couple of traps the prosecution loves to use is to ask, reasonably, “When did you decide to shoot?” and “why did you shoot to kill?”

You don’t decide to shoot; the predatory threat’s free-will illegal actions decide that for you under the very definition of use of force.

You didn’t viciously shoot to kill, you reluctantly shot to live!

Watch the “Fancy Lawyer’s Tricks” video by Massad Ayoob, available from Lethal Force Institute.

Here are a few of your own you can make them jump through hoops with:

Jacob v. Wood v. Hall 130 F. 3d 373 (9th Cir 1997): Petition for habeas relief not moot if collateral consequences continue to flow from the underlying conviction.

Padreuita v. Lake Worth 367 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 1979): conviction obtained by fraud or perjury or other corrupt means is basis for malicious prosecution.

Central Machinery v. Williams 424 So. 2d 201 (2nd DCA 1983): malice is shown in commencement or contrivance of prosecution.

Mooney v. Holohan 294 u. S. 103; 55 S. Ct. 340 (1935): can’t contrive a conviction by the obfuscation of relevant facts.

Brady v. Maryland 373 u. S. 83; 83 S. Ct. 1194 (1963): a "Brady violation" occurs when the state withholds relevant favorable or exculpatory evidence that could reasonably have altered the outcome.

Garcia v. State 622 So. 2d 1325 at 1331 (Fla. 1993): it’s of no consequence if the falsehood goes to the credibility of the witness, it’s materially relevant and admissible.

Napue v. Illinois 360 u. S. at 269: evidence of a trait, habit or pattern of the witness similar to the facts at bar is relevant and therefore admissible and can’t be withheld by the prosecution or concealed from the jury.

It wouldn’t matter if you were Annie Oakley and could put a bullet through the eye on the head of a dime at a thousand yards on demand; your answer must always be “NO, I justly employed only the necessary amount of immediate countervailing force to stop his unprovoked illegal assault against me.”

Don’t give the definition of use of force -let them work for it.

Look concerned, but calm and assured: professional.

Remember about bearing and demeanor?

Remember when we discussed appearance and dress?

Remember how Scott Peterson’s altered appearance at the time of his arrest negatively affected the public’s opinion of him?

If you’re dressed like Dirty Billy the Bad-ass Biker at the time of your arrest, then it’ll be Dirty Billy the Bad-ass Biker’s mugshot that the jury gets to ogle, blown up and in color, courtesy of the prosecution.

Why create more headaches for yourself?

Your very choice of language can drastically influence the outcome of your trial.

I’m sure the jury -and your attorney -would prefer to hear you intelligently relate how you humanely “directed” Mister Threat to the ground with a simple arm bar, instead of how the threat mysteriously expired after you “made him do the chicken” employing the famous “super Bruce Lee killer kung-fu sleeper choke-out.”

Any technical information the average juror isn’t innately familiar with is viewed with suspicion and contempt, like superstitious medieval serfs scrutinizing a magic act, immediately drawing unjustified conclusions as to your guilt, permanently prejudicing your subsequent ability to further positively influence jurors with what, even to them, is the obvious truth.

Things that they “just know aren’t right,” like your having shot a knife-wielding threat twenty feet away, when introduced by the prosecution without your ability to properly prepare and instruct jurors by introducing the Tueller drill first, may damage your case beyond redemption.

They won’t see the same powerful, homicidal career thug that you saw just as he was about to happily murder you -they’ll only see the autopsy photos of the peaceful-looking “victim” of your unwarranted “aggression,” and his clean-cut, smiling high-school picture, as his paid-by-the-prosecution “friends” and relatives, sobbing, advise the evil social fascist jury what a wonderful, caring person he was, singing in the choir, working tirelessly to save the whales and selflessly donating to world peace.

According to federal rule of evidence 404B, any prior acts by the perpetrator unknown to you at the time his illegal assault against you are inadmissible as evidence.

Before you shoot the bum, yell, “Hey, are you a criminal?”

“Witnesses” who were never there will relate in exhausting detail how they observed the entire terrible spectacle.

Funny, though, their language about it mirrors that of the crime report exactly. Oh, well -just a coincidence, huh?

Each time a jury hears a case, they aren’t only trying you, but the very law that brought you to their attention.

If they feel the law is unjust, it’s their right and duty to bring in a verdict of “not guilty,” establishing a legal precedent and affirming that, in their opinion, nobody else will ever be maliciously convicted under these circumstances, either.

Here’s the secret: nobody ever tells the jurors! That job falls only to you.

Read “Jury Nullification,” by Clay Conrad, available from Laissez Faire Books.

With increasing regularity, juries are being filled from that rapidly-growing segment of society that isn’t the best-educated or the best-informed examples of our culture.

If your attorney suggests “pleading the fifth,” fire him NOW!

He’s incompetent, and if you’re lucky, you’ll live to see prison.

Instead, plead the Second.

The reason for the trial will be to determine the circumstances involving the death of a human, a fellow unorganized Militia member.

The jury will attempt to determine your mindset at the time you justifiably pulled the trigger.

They‘ll want to know if you possessed mens rea, literally, a guilty mind.

You must have acted as a reasonable and prudent man, in the same situation, seeing what you saw and knowing what you knew.

Everything you see or do up to that point is discoverable, that is, it’s available to both sides.

This book and any others you’ve read, as well as any training videos you’ve watched, audio tapes you’ve listened to, and any courses you’ve taken comprise the defense you’ll present, but you must first document that you’d comprehended the information and mastered the skills before you justifiably employed them.


Type up a statement documenting all your training and have it notarized.

Keep copies of all certificates you earn.

Instructor’s diplomas are always well-received.

Special recognition, such as a Medal of Honor, is esteemed.

Self-protection is just that, only a defense, and depending on circumstances, may be summarily denied by the impious social fascist judge.

It’s up to you to create the “jury of your peers” that’ll try you.

The responsibility is literally in your hands to change the opinion of the ignorant social fascist jurors by patiently convincing them, through reason and logic, that the information contained in this book is the demonstrable truth.

Your life may well depend on it.

That means that if the specific knowledge to set you free isn’t part of common knowledge, what the average layperson knows, it’s entirely up to you to educate them.

The other side will keep off the jury anyone who could possibly help you. How?

Have your attorney challenge every juror for cause - just like they’ll do to you.

“Are you willing to handle and manipulate the legal defensive firearm in question?”

“Have you ever donated time or money to an extremist victim disarmament organization?”

Most will probably answer no, but we know that with just a little digging, many so-called “neutral” groups will easily be demonstrated to be rabidly extremist victim disarmament.

“Could you kill a predatory criminal to protect innocent life? Do you belong to the Brady Campaign? The Violence Policy Center? Would you ask to leave the room, or become ill, at the sight of a full-size color autopsy photo or video? Are you against hunting?”

You get the idea. Remove them for cause.

Constructively inform the jury by putting them in your place with questions that begin, “If I had performed those same actions to protect the President of the united States,” or, “If it had been your life that had been saved, instead of my wife, my child, et cetera.”

The proper context is critical.

It’s up to you to provide an affirmative defense: you’re asking that if they believe your story, they must find you not guilty.

This shifts the burden of proof to you. This requires that you take the stand.

Don’t be naïve enough to believe that your trial will be fair, or that the truth will ever come out.

Mercenary proxy-guardian “police” and prosecutors will conspire to lie, cheat, steal, manufacture and plant evidence, and deliberately mislead the carefully-crafted jury in order to secure a conviction, as they did with the Aisenbergs in Florida, who’re currently asking one point six million dollars just to recover attorney fees.

Remember what the disgraceful FBI did to honest “security” guard Richard Jewell after the Olympic bombing, or to innocent Joseph Salvatti in Boston?

They do it every day, relying on “junk science” to convict known innocents.

Mistakes will still put you behind bars.

In New York v. James Pennington, his attorney told him to lie to the jury - and then, of course, denied it.

Pennington languishes in prison to this day.

In Indiana v. Charles Etienne, ineffective defense is what put Etienne in behind bars -but he’s still in prison.

After all evidence has been presented, attorney and prosecutor have both emotionally delivered their rousing closing arguments, tranquility ensues, the dust slowly settles, and the regal judge sternly unconstitutionally directs the jury to carefully follow every letter of his instructions, including specifically not to judge whether they consider the law itself just, fair or even applicable under the circumstances of the particular case.

Costs in both financial and psychological pain will rapidly accrue.

It’ll get very expensive quickly, and your smiling lawyer, confidently predicting your acquittal, will demand full payment up front.

How much?

Five hundred thousand dollars bail at ten percent equals fifty thousand dollars.

Kiss your house goodbye.

Twenty five thousand dollars retainer, maybe a hundred thousand to two hundred thousand dollars lawyer’s fees just for the trial, not counting expert witness’s fees, detectives, process servers, and other ancillary legal personnel and fees.

Any legal defensive firearms you formerly owned are now gone, with very little likelihood of you ever seeing (or even being compensated for) them again -and we haven’t even gotten to the civil judgment yet.

The disinformation media will gleefully crucify you as a homicidal nutcase and link you to every horrible atrocity of the past century, demanding you be made an example of while unscrupulous liars will make headlines denouncing you, claiming to be witnesses to everything they’ve never seen or heard.

The damage is done: it doesn’t need to be truth, just the headline.

The blatantly extremist victim disarmament district attorney will be clamoring for a plea bargain which will conveniently mitigate your circumstances and leave you with a permanent criminal record while the lower court judge, a charter member of the Banana-head Brady Campaign will suppress favorable evidence and witnesses and allow hostile social fascist jurors to be seated and then set aside the jury’s verdict and impose his own left-field verdict and sentence.

Your employer will fire you, your wife will divorce you, both bullies and the disinformation media will assault your precious children at school and your friends, well, they’d like to help, but, you know, with the publicity and all…

When you’re convicted in criminal court, you’ll be placed into population with the same scum of the earth you desperately tried to protect your innocent family against and you’ll spend the rest of your tortured life trying not to become the wife of a three-hundred-pound monster named Bubba, and either die an agonizing violent death or a longer, more painful death from AIDS.

That’s just round one.

Either way, you get to stand trial in civil court, where the burden of proof against you is even lower.

Even if you killed the bad guy, his heirs, or at least his lawyers, will take not only every asset you ever had, but also everything your heirs would ever have had.

Email this page