Right to Defend in a Free Country

Persecution and prosecution of innocent people who are merely defending themselves (a right they have) from thugs stand against our country!

Mark McCloskey and his wife Patricia stood in their yard, with him holding what appears to be an AR-15 and her holding a semi-auto pistol in a stand against those (a mob of violent protesters) who posed a threat to them, their home, and property. A show of force is the first line of defense–a good deterant. This was presented over the news. It seemed to be accepted as a right they had. However, instead of applauded for his stand, he was served a warrant and all his firearms were confiscated! Mark and Patricia McCloskey were both charged with felony unlawful use of a weapon per prosecutor Kim Gardner’s direction, which is punishable by four years in prison and a potential $10,000.00 fine (Fox News report, Tucker Carlson, July 20, 2020). But why? Mr. McCloskey said the police were courteous and resented what they were ordered to do, but they nevertheless had to obey their orders which involved taking their firearms.

[There is claim however that Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey were pointing their guns at people who were not on their property. This would change whether they were justified or not.]

I feared the day when our own police would be turned against us! However, that day has already occurred due to unjust (illegal) laws that police have a sworn duty to enforce. But nothing this openly blatant has occurred in which case citizens are disallowed to defend themselves on their own property from thugs. The criminals are the ones now being supported by the police.

We now have illogical interpretations as to what is just with recent discourse apparently providing a means (excuse) for those intruding through public office to execute an agenda to over-throw our country. Demonstrations and protests fall under the right to peaceful assembly, but they do not allow for any criminal activity that takes away our rights to protect ourselves. Is not the same type of unrestrained injustice in essence what the protests were originally against? Another agenda, using this as an apparent opportunity, is quite obvious.

[This reminds me of how feminists took over legitimate equality efforts originally taking place for a brief period during the ’70s when men and women were objectively united in fighting for real equality of the sexes.]

We have also created and enforced laws that violate our Consititution using the elevated status of women as an avenue to implement them–injustice undermining our U.S Constitution and the premise of equal justice for all. And this has been done by the same political party (democrats) supporting this take-over.

Similar in principle to what took place in the equality effort, many people, including both republicans and democrats, were initially legitimately protesting against the George Floyd incident and other injustices (murders and brutality) committed by the police under the premise of equal justice for all which includes blacks.

The twist in logic (and direction) allowing this injustice to occur is built upon the same premise originating through the same political party (democrats) as the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). However, it has been renewed by the Republican Party, that is up until President Trump, who I applaud for not renewing the prejudiced and discrimatory Act that opposes our U. S. Constitution and the premise of equal justice for all. The VAWA was allowed, it’s claimed, due to a play on words, merely influencing the ignorant and weak-minded with the weighted and deliberalty misguided idea ‘that to be against the unlawful Act would be hating (and supporting violence against) women’, although allowing hate and violence against one segment of the population–men–is the real meaning that doesn’t seem to matter or get realized. Setting a precedence after this, Title IX was also an Act used in the same manner–to discriminate and perpetuate prejudice against men via our colleges and universities where misandry has been incorporated into the ciriculum. [I experienced plenty of this first-hand as a student and as a professor.]

Only to the very ignorant, well actually stupid (since ignorance can be changed by enlightenment), do violations in response to violations make ‘sense’. But many, other than blind followers, are not really this stupid. Worse, they have hidden agendas (ill-intentions) that ‘back up’ such a twist of logic to enable the take-over and destruction of our country to occur. [Just like with the VAWA and women, if one opposes the violent and discriminatory theme these efforts have adopted, you are a racist.] The riots now, with the focus shifting and slogans and hate incorporated, are already far removed from the ethical integrity upon which the demonstrations were originally built.

Alan Millard has been involved as a prominnnt men’s equality advocate for several decades, beginning in the early ’80s. He began writing his first book, Equality: A Man’s Claim, in the Spring of 1983. He has been thereafter continually affliated with the major men’s rights organizations and has contributed many articles, radio and some television broadcasts. His work includes research conducted through his graduate and doctoral coursework and knowledge acquired through his independent studies and collegue associations as a university professor. He headed the group Men and Fathers for Justice which still exists in virtual form through Facebook. He is the author of three books addressing men’s equality concerns. His most recent book, A Flaw From Within: How Women’s Higher Status Defies Equal Justice, Violates Men, and Destroys Society, is available through Amazon.