Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Some on the Left are now arguing that the Second Amendment somehow justifies physically interfering with law enforcement. That is not what the Constitution says. At all. Let me set the record straight. You absolutely have the right to carry a gun. Period. Full stop. You do not have... show more

Dan Crenshaw

1,272,312 subscribers

35,249 views • 8 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

34 Comments

Chad Scott8 months ago

He didn't get into a fist fight with cops. The cops attacked him, and he was defending a woman, the fact that you as a former member of the military defend, these fucking agents is disgusting. You are a disgusting human and an affront to the oath you took you should renounce all ties to any previous military service because of your un-American pathetic stance.

Eric Mrozek 🇺🇸🦅🌎⚛️🧦🗽✍🏻8 months ago

Wait a minute. Don't conservatives say that the point of the Second Amendment is to resist a tyrannical government? I'm smelling hypocrisy!

rgrantm8 months ago

Alex didn’t attack any law enforcement officer. He was disarmed by one of the officers and then shot several times in the back. As an x-policeman no excuse for that kind of reaction especially shooting someone in the back while down on the ground.

RedBlackPaws8 months ago

Pretending the guy wasn't executed after being disarmed is pretty low. You've shredded your credibility to support agents that killed a man without cause, but hey, it's your team right, Dan? So, even if they killed a child, you'd pretend it was justified.

Colin Shay8 months ago

Except Alex Pretti didn't fight ICE or the police. He was filming them, which he has every right to do. Then, when they assaulted a woman, he politely tried to help her up off the ground. For that, he was pepper sprayed, assaulted & murdered. I hope that helps, Mcfuckface.

serenityguide8 months ago

It's not the left, it's YOUR ghoulish DHS that implied that. Alex Pretti never took out his gun, never brandished it, They executed him and they blamed it on him having a gun. Stop blaming the left for what the ghouls in your administration do and say.

Brian Clark8 months ago

He was helping up a woman that was violently knocked to the ground. Fuck you pathetic heartless disingenuous pissants.

TitanToc8 months ago

Fuck you. The same applies to law enforcement. They set the example for all Americans.

Sassy Quatch8 months ago

Stfu red-flag Dan. Piece of shit. Your opinion on 2a is rejected forever.

Warren Souther8 months ago

And where are we @DanCrenshawTX for national reciprocity on ccw?

Pythagoras📡8 months ago

Not quite true. You do have a right to harm law enforcement. Beat them. Injure them. Hospitalize them. But only if you're doing it for DT and not against him.

Tha Duece8 months ago

BS he lost his rights to carry when he committed a crime while carrying a gun if they had done there job the 1st instance he would be facing 10 yrs in prison for having that gun on him Minnesota law so miss me with the rights BS it's against law to do what he did period

All-Season Husker8 months ago

What a bootlicker you’ve always been.

Bob Smith8 months ago

If you’re defending what happened to Pretti, you’ve lost your way. God is watching.

jonathan furer8 months ago

He never withdrew his weapon and is irrelevant to the ultimate question…did the cops have a right to murder him for carrying weapons? The cops were being belligerent.

Jagged Vaudeville8 months ago

Pardon? Sit down, Baglapper.

Jarrett Northup8 months ago

Dan your thought on AG Pirro’s gun rhetoric?

Jeff Davies - Harris/Kelly 20288 months ago

Fucking hypocrite aren’t you, Crenshaw…

Matt G8 months ago

You and your colleagues will pay for your insipid covering for a pants shitting child rapist. Reap what you sow, Harvest is coming.

Mike Forster8 months ago

Ice is not “law enforcement “ they are hired to arrest illegal immigrants.

P95PG0018 months ago

Some on the right are now saying you shouldn't have the right to bear arms (depending on who you voted for, of course). Some on the right think that carrying a weapon (not brandishing, but just carrying) entitles you to a death sentence without trial. Be better, Dan Crenshaw.

Nate7 months ago

Doesn’t earn a death Warren Dan, and what do you call that little Twat Kyle Rittenhouse?

Serdafied8 months ago

What relevance does the earlier video have on the cops escalating and being lawless thugs who attack and assault civilians then use his own rights against him to kill him? I remember when I used to think you were a strong conservative. Now you’re just another populist troll.

BigTex28 months ago

If LEOs are acting unlawfully….. the whole reason why we have 2A dumb dumb

Scott Salt8 months ago

So you found a loophole for murder?

Rick Faulconer8 months ago

You’re okay with the government executing Americans on the street

Tokin8 months ago

We can hear the cracking in your voice dude. You know you don’t even believe yourself 🤦🏽‍♂️

DaddyBeard8 months ago

Not a reason for murder.

Guy Online8 months ago

This is what you hear when they are afraid, when they know they have gone too far, when they know they could be next. Suddenly the laws don't matter, just their own backside.

Mace8 months ago

You absolutely have the right to carry a gun. Period. Full stop. Ok, then you absolutely disagree with the Mn. law that prohibits carrying a gun *consealed or otherwise* while at a protest, right?? you hate "RED FLAG" laws , right?

J The Un4givin8 months ago

What was the second amendment for jackass...snake pliskin wanna be didn't you take an oath or some shit

Joey Eldridge8 months ago

Why are you against Americans? Why do you support Pedophiles and Nazis???

Scott Lee kimball8 months ago

Lamof ..:

James M7 months ago

I agree we must protect tail lights before human life

Related Videos

BASH: “So are you saying it's not okay for him to exercise his Second Amendment right – not to mention his First Amendment right to be there in the first place – but his Second Amendment right to carry a gun? And if you do, you can be shot by federal law enforcement?” BOVINO: "No, I didn't say that, Dana. I never said that. What I'm saying is we respect that Second Amendment right. But those rights don't count when you riot and assault, delay, obstruct and impede law enforcement officers."

BASH: “So are you saying it's not okay for him to exercise his Second Amendment right – not to mention his First Amendment right to be there in the first place – but his Second Amendment right to carry a gun? And if you do, you can be shot by federal law enforcement?” BOVINO: "No, I didn't say that, Dana. I never said that. What I'm saying is we respect that Second Amendment right. But those rights don't count when you riot and assault, delay, obstruct and impede law enforcement officers."

State of the Union

37,354 views • 8 months ago

.Karoline Leavitt Karoline Leavitt: The president supports the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens, absolutely...while Americans have a constitution right to bear arms, Americans do not have a Constitution right to impede lawful immigration enforcement operations and any gun owner knows that when you are carrying a weapon...and you are confronted by law enforcement you are raising the assumption of risk and the risk of force being used against you. That's unfortunately what took place on Saturday. Full video here:

.Karoline Leavitt Karoline Leavitt: The president supports the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens, absolutely...while Americans have a constitution right to bear arms, Americans do not have a Constitution right to impede lawful immigration enforcement operations and any gun owner knows that when you are carrying a weapon...and you are confronted by law enforcement you are raising the assumption of risk and the risk of force being used against you. That's unfortunately what took place on Saturday. Full video here:

CSPAN

42,320 views • 8 months ago

As I said last night, complaining that the victim had a gun is a terrible explanation. The 2nd Amendment protects the right to bear arms for all law abiding American - not just law enforcement.

As I said last night, complaining that the victim had a gun is a terrible explanation. The 2nd Amendment protects the right to bear arms for all law abiding American - not just law enforcement.

Marc Short

21,236 views • 8 months ago

Joe Borelli: “Well, let's be clear. Benny Johnson's right. [Alex Pretti’s] a violent psychopath who was h*ll bent on attacking federal law enforcement. We just saw that on video. I mean, he clearly spit at the law enforcement officer. He clearly was doing some sort of jujitsu kicks against the vehicle, which, you know, resulted in the vehicle being smashed and broken.” “And I think I just want to point out as someone who does believe in the Second Amendment, and there was so much made about his firearm, responsible gun owners in the concealed carry community, in the gun community, no one who's a responsible gun owner provokes and escalates a fight. That is rule number one, if you are going to carry a firearm, is that you automatically lose every fight, you walk away, you don't escalate situations, unless not with law enforcement or with anyone else. He is someone who acted wildly irresponsible.” “The media narrative about this guy, that he was the second coming of the Lord and he was just this peaceful guy, that's disproven by that video, and Benny Johnson's right.”

Joe Borelli: “Well, let's be clear. Benny Johnson's right. [Alex Pretti’s] a violent psychopath who was h*ll bent on attacking federal law enforcement. We just saw that on video. I mean, he clearly spit at the law enforcement officer. He clearly was doing some sort of jujitsu kicks against the vehicle, which, you know, resulted in the vehicle being smashed and broken.” “And I think I just want to point out as someone who does believe in the Second Amendment, and there was so much made about his firearm, responsible gun owners in the concealed carry community, in the gun community, no one who's a responsible gun owner provokes and escalates a fight. That is rule number one, if you are going to carry a firearm, is that you automatically lose every fight, you walk away, you don't escalate situations, unless not with law enforcement or with anyone else. He is someone who acted wildly irresponsible.” “The media narrative about this guy, that he was the second coming of the Lord and he was just this peaceful guy, that's disproven by that video, and Benny Johnson's right.”

RedWave Press

116,949 views • 8 months ago

Joe Borelli: “Are you allowed to interfere with law enforcement?… If he would've stood on the sidewalk with a sign or with a camera, he would not be dead right now. But that's not what he did. He interfered with law enforcement.” Abby Phillip: “What was it about his conduct that you think was illegal or whatever it was?” Joe Borelli: “In close proximity, in contact with a law enforcement official.” Abby Phillip: “ But is he allowed to record what law enforcement is doing?” Joe Borelli: “Yes, from a safe distance. You're not allowed to actually be—“ Abby Phillip: “Okay. So, based on the video that you saw, was he at a safe distance?” Joe Borelli: “No... and he should have complied [with law enforcement].” Correct!

Joe Borelli: “Are you allowed to interfere with law enforcement?… If he would've stood on the sidewalk with a sign or with a camera, he would not be dead right now. But that's not what he did. He interfered with law enforcement.” Abby Phillip: “What was it about his conduct that you think was illegal or whatever it was?” Joe Borelli: “In close proximity, in contact with a law enforcement official.” Abby Phillip: “ But is he allowed to record what law enforcement is doing?” Joe Borelli: “Yes, from a safe distance. You're not allowed to actually be—“ Abby Phillip: “Okay. So, based on the video that you saw, was he at a safe distance?” Joe Borelli: “No... and he should have complied [with law enforcement].” Correct!

RedWave Press

108,560 views • 8 months ago

Fiery comments from CNN's Scott Jennings on today's events in Minneapolis: "What strikes me is, first of all, it's extremely sad and unfortunate that someone died. I mean, the political fighting and disagreements aside, it's terrible. You don't want people to die in law enforcement situations or otherwise." "But it strikes me that we are undergoing an epidemic of political vigilantism right now. Why are people showing up in vehicles, in convoys, not just in Minneapolis, but all over the country in an effort to obstruct lawful federal law enforcement activities? This is not an isolated incident. We have had hundreds of car rammings against ICE agents all over the country. According to DHS, this lady in this car today, along with other vehicles, had been tracking ICE agents around. Why are people believing that they can drive their car into a federal law enforcement situation and that is an appropriate thing to do?" "I understand they don't like the fact that these agents are enforcing existing immigration law, but that's not how we change laws in this country. If you don't like law, you talk to the politicians. You don't drive your car into the middle of a building or a law enforcement situation that's being occupied by the people who are simply there to enforce the law. If I don't like how much the IRS is charging me in taxes, I don't drive my car into the Treasury Department try to run somebody over. I call my congressman." "Political vigilantism is being encouraged by Democratic officials like the lieutenant governor of Minnesota, Peggy Flanagan, who earlier this year told people to 'put your bodies on the line' and Tim Walz calling these guys gestapo all year. What do you think happens when you radicalize a base of people about this?"

Fiery comments from CNN's Scott Jennings on today's events in Minneapolis: "What strikes me is, first of all, it's extremely sad and unfortunate that someone died. I mean, the political fighting and disagreements aside, it's terrible. You don't want people to die in law enforcement situations or otherwise." "But it strikes me that we are undergoing an epidemic of political vigilantism right now. Why are people showing up in vehicles, in convoys, not just in Minneapolis, but all over the country in an effort to obstruct lawful federal law enforcement activities? This is not an isolated incident. We have had hundreds of car rammings against ICE agents all over the country. According to DHS, this lady in this car today, along with other vehicles, had been tracking ICE agents around. Why are people believing that they can drive their car into a federal law enforcement situation and that is an appropriate thing to do?" "I understand they don't like the fact that these agents are enforcing existing immigration law, but that's not how we change laws in this country. If you don't like law, you talk to the politicians. You don't drive your car into the middle of a building or a law enforcement situation that's being occupied by the people who are simply there to enforce the law. If I don't like how much the IRS is charging me in taxes, I don't drive my car into the Treasury Department try to run somebody over. I call my congressman." "Political vigilantism is being encouraged by Democratic officials like the lieutenant governor of Minnesota, Peggy Flanagan, who earlier this year told people to 'put your bodies on the line' and Tim Walz calling these guys gestapo all year. What do you think happens when you radicalize a base of people about this?"

Curtis Houck

229,971 views • 8 months ago

Clarence Thomas explained the Second Amendment in one sentence. And every politician who talks about what gun rights they are willing to “let” you keep should hear it. The Second Amendment does not grant the right. It assumes the right already exists. That means the government does not give you the right to keep and bear arms. The amendment tells the government what it cannot do to a right you already had. Rights first. Government second. That is the order. And once you understand that, every gun law looks different. Because now the government is the one that has to explain itself. Not you. Then Thomas tells a story about Justice Breyer asking what he would do if a man with a machete walked up on his porch demanding money. Thomas’s answer? He would be cleaning his guns. That is why this clip hits different. He does not just rule on the Second Amendment. He understands it. He lives it. And he connects it to the history most gun control speeches leave out: The 14th Amendment. Freed slaves. The right to defend yourself from people trying to kill you. Because a citizen who cannot protect his own life does not stay a citizen for very long. Do you think most politicians understand the Second Amendment, or do they just talk around it? Shop the America Hat here:

Clarence Thomas explained the Second Amendment in one sentence. And every politician who talks about what gun rights they are willing to “let” you keep should hear it. The Second Amendment does not grant the right. It assumes the right already exists. That means the government does not give you the right to keep and bear arms. The amendment tells the government what it cannot do to a right you already had. Rights first. Government second. That is the order. And once you understand that, every gun law looks different. Because now the government is the one that has to explain itself. Not you. Then Thomas tells a story about Justice Breyer asking what he would do if a man with a machete walked up on his porch demanding money. Thomas’s answer? He would be cleaning his guns. That is why this clip hits different. He does not just rule on the Second Amendment. He understands it. He lives it. And he connects it to the history most gun control speeches leave out: The 14th Amendment. Freed slaves. The right to defend yourself from people trying to kill you. Because a citizen who cannot protect his own life does not stay a citizen for very long. Do you think most politicians understand the Second Amendment, or do they just talk around it? Shop the America Hat here:

Colion Noir

108,813 views • 19 days ago

Must Listen: Justice Alito reveals the obvious irony of citing the Black Codes as justification for Hawaii’s 2023 firearm restriction law. “They wanted to disarm the Black population in order to help the Klan terrorize them...they wanted to put them at the mercy of racist law enforcement officers. So is it not the height of irony to cite a law that was enacted for exactly the purpose of preventing someone from exercising the Second Amendment right, to cite this as an example of what the Second Amendment protects.”⁩

Must Listen: Justice Alito reveals the obvious irony of citing the Black Codes as justification for Hawaii’s 2023 firearm restriction law. “They wanted to disarm the Black population in order to help the Klan terrorize them...they wanted to put them at the mercy of racist law enforcement officers. So is it not the height of irony to cite a law that was enacted for exactly the purpose of preventing someone from exercising the Second Amendment right, to cite this as an example of what the Second Amendment protects.”⁩

Carrie Severino

457,720 views • 8 months ago

Gallego on Mamdani: "It's okay to say 'I disagree with this, this, and this, but I agree with that.' But the idea that we're just gonna throw out people that are really bringing in new ideas to the fold, exciting people, just because they're slightly to the right or to the left of us is dumb. The problem with Democrats is that we have been shrinking our tent as much as possible to the point where there are not many people left. And that happens on the left side of our party and it also happens on the right side of the party."

Gallego on Mamdani: "It's okay to say 'I disagree with this, this, and this, but I agree with that.' But the idea that we're just gonna throw out people that are really bringing in new ideas to the fold, exciting people, just because they're slightly to the right or to the left of us is dumb. The problem with Democrats is that we have been shrinking our tent as much as possible to the point where there are not many people left. And that happens on the left side of our party and it also happens on the right side of the party."

Aaron Rupar

469,131 views • 1 year ago

🚨 HOLY CRAP! The Florida CFO says ANYONE who tries attacking or killing Florida law enforcement can "expect to be DEAD" This applies to Iranian-linked or Muslim terrorists! ☀️ "Expect to be PUT IN THE DIRT. It's simple as that!" "Florida law enforcement DOES NOT STAND for ANY of that CRAP." "If you are going to come after our law enforcement with the intent to hurt or kill law enforcement, expect to be dead." "They have every right to protect themselves, to get home to their families, and we are going to stand with them when incidents like that happen." — Blaise Ingoglia Not. In. Florida.

🚨 HOLY CRAP! The Florida CFO says ANYONE who tries attacking or killing Florida law enforcement can "expect to be DEAD" This applies to Iranian-linked or Muslim terrorists! ☀️ "Expect to be PUT IN THE DIRT. It's simple as that!" "Florida law enforcement DOES NOT STAND for ANY of that CRAP." "If you are going to come after our law enforcement with the intent to hurt or kill law enforcement, expect to be dead." "They have every right to protect themselves, to get home to their families, and we are going to stand with them when incidents like that happen." — Blaise Ingoglia Not. In. Florida.

Eric Daugherty

551,500 views • 7 months ago

🚨 HOLY CRAP! The Florida CFO says ANYONE who tries attacking or killing Florida law enforcement can "expect to be DEAD" This applies to Iranian-linked or Muslim terrorists! ☀️ "Expect to be PUT IN THE DIRT. It's simple as that!" "Florida law enforcement DOES NOT STAND for ANY of that CRAP." "If you are going to come after our law enforcement with the intent to hurt or kill law enforcement, expect to be dead." "They have every right to protect themselves, to get home to their families, and we are going to stand with them when incidents like that happen." — Blaise Ingoglia Not. In. Florida.Blaise Ingoglia

🚨 HOLY CRAP! The Florida CFO says ANYONE who tries attacking or killing Florida law enforcement can "expect to be DEAD" This applies to Iranian-linked or Muslim terrorists! ☀️ "Expect to be PUT IN THE DIRT. It's simple as that!" "Florida law enforcement DOES NOT STAND for ANY of that CRAP." "If you are going to come after our law enforcement with the intent to hurt or kill law enforcement, expect to be dead." "They have every right to protect themselves, to get home to their families, and we are going to stand with them when incidents like that happen." — Blaise Ingoglia Not. In. Florida.Blaise Ingoglia

War Correspondent

20,066 views • 1 month ago

CNN's Brad Todd Todd: "You peacefully protest in the town square. You peacefully protest with a letter to the editor. You peacefully violence right now -- you peacefully protest by starting a letter to the editor or a podcast" "No, no you cannot interfere with [law enforcement]" "Civil disobedience is honored in this country and always should be." "First off, you can't interfere with federal law enforcement activity and it's a violation of Minnesota state law if your interference with that activity causes someone who's guilty of something or being pursued to be a get away, let's go back -- hold on. Civil disobedience is an honored tradition in this country. We want to keep it. That means that you have to be willing to take the legal punishment that comes with that action, to demonstrate that the laws are immoral. That's what civil disobedience is." "They have a right to protest. It's not advisable to go interfere with lawful law enforcement activity" "Look, I don't think we have training for people who are in the immigration police to conduct, do crowd control. That's why the local police need to be there to be a buffer between protesters who are not trying to disrupt."

CNN's Brad Todd Todd: "You peacefully protest in the town square. You peacefully protest with a letter to the editor. You peacefully violence right now -- you peacefully protest by starting a letter to the editor or a podcast" "No, no you cannot interfere with [law enforcement]" "Civil disobedience is honored in this country and always should be." "First off, you can't interfere with federal law enforcement activity and it's a violation of Minnesota state law if your interference with that activity causes someone who's guilty of something or being pursued to be a get away, let's go back -- hold on. Civil disobedience is an honored tradition in this country. We want to keep it. That means that you have to be willing to take the legal punishment that comes with that action, to demonstrate that the laws are immoral. That's what civil disobedience is." "They have a right to protest. It's not advisable to go interfere with lawful law enforcement activity" "Look, I don't think we have training for people who are in the immigration police to conduct, do crowd control. That's why the local police need to be there to be a buffer between protesters who are not trying to disrupt."

Curtis Houck

32,312 views • 8 months ago

T.I. expressed his confusion to Deante Kyle about people serving prison time for possessing a firearm as a felon, He claims he learnt that federal laws are based off the guidelines of the Constitution, and the Second Amendment states that people have the right to bear arms and that those rights are inalienable👀🫩 “Now in my research and my studies i have found that federal laws are based off of the guidelines of the constitution, constitution second amendment says we have the right to bear arms, those rights or that right is inalienable, inalienable means it can’t be taken away or given away, so if the right to bear arms is an inalienable right, how are there so many people doing time because they had a firearm as a felon”

T.I. expressed his confusion to Deante Kyle about people serving prison time for possessing a firearm as a felon, He claims he learnt that federal laws are based off the guidelines of the Constitution, and the Second Amendment states that people have the right to bear arms and that those rights are inalienable👀🫩 “Now in my research and my studies i have found that federal laws are based off of the guidelines of the constitution, constitution second amendment says we have the right to bear arms, those rights or that right is inalienable, inalienable means it can’t be taken away or given away, so if the right to bear arms is an inalienable right, how are there so many people doing time because they had a firearm as a felon”

flame⛧

159,794 views • 4 months ago

ABC’s Rachel Scott: “There’s a lot of emotion in Minnesota across the country over this incident, but you’re calling Renee Good a deranged leftist. There’s been heated rhetoric that we’ve also heard from officials. What responsibility do you and the President have to defuse some of the tension that we are seeing play out in Minnesota, bring down the temperature as this investigation is unfolding?” Vice President JD Vance JD Vance: “What we have a responsibility to do is to protect the people who are enforcing the law and protect the country writ large, whether you’re Democrat or Republican, you deserve to have the people’s laws enforced in the United States of America. Now, again, I don’t — I’m not happy that this woman lost her life. I’m not happy that this woman was there at a protest, violating the law by interfering with a law enforcement action. I think that we can all recognize that the best way to turn down the temperature is to tell people to take their concerns about immigration policy to the ballot box, stop assaulting and stop inciting violence against our law enforcement officers. That’s the best way to take down the temperature. And we’re not — look, we’re not going to give in to terrorism on this and that’s exactly what’s happening. People trying to antagonize to commit acts of violence. They throw bricks at them. Sometimes, they shoot at them. Sometimes, they dox them. Sometimes they go to their place of residence and harass their families. This is classic terrorism. And we cannot say that when, when, when a far-left fringe is inciting violence against our brave law enforcement officials, that we’re no longer going to enforce the law, that’s rewarding the very people who are engaged in this garbage. The actual reward that they just got is a new assistant attorney general who is going to prosecute and investigate this stuff even more, even more aggressively than before.”

ABC’s Rachel Scott: “There’s a lot of emotion in Minnesota across the country over this incident, but you’re calling Renee Good a deranged leftist. There’s been heated rhetoric that we’ve also heard from officials. What responsibility do you and the President have to defuse some of the tension that we are seeing play out in Minnesota, bring down the temperature as this investigation is unfolding?” Vice President JD Vance JD Vance: “What we have a responsibility to do is to protect the people who are enforcing the law and protect the country writ large, whether you’re Democrat or Republican, you deserve to have the people’s laws enforced in the United States of America. Now, again, I don’t — I’m not happy that this woman lost her life. I’m not happy that this woman was there at a protest, violating the law by interfering with a law enforcement action. I think that we can all recognize that the best way to turn down the temperature is to tell people to take their concerns about immigration policy to the ballot box, stop assaulting and stop inciting violence against our law enforcement officers. That’s the best way to take down the temperature. And we’re not — look, we’re not going to give in to terrorism on this and that’s exactly what’s happening. People trying to antagonize to commit acts of violence. They throw bricks at them. Sometimes, they shoot at them. Sometimes, they dox them. Sometimes they go to their place of residence and harass their families. This is classic terrorism. And we cannot say that when, when, when a far-left fringe is inciting violence against our brave law enforcement officials, that we’re no longer going to enforce the law, that’s rewarding the very people who are engaged in this garbage. The actual reward that they just got is a new assistant attorney general who is going to prosecute and investigate this stuff even more, even more aggressively than before.”

Curtis Houck

25,550 views • 8 months ago

I am not as yet, but more and more people are becoming State Nationals and withdrawing for the United States Corporations and it's policy enforcement. Remember, ALL cities are corporations and Police Officer work for cities and NOT "unincorporated" areas that are controlled by counties. Take a listen to this gentleman NOT get a ticket or have his unregistered vehicle towed by the "Police" or "policy enforcement officer". It's a tricky dance with English diction in order to not fall into their enforcement jurisdiction. This gentleman handled it perfectly. In order to be a State national you need to change the type of passport you have which will legally allow you to travel freely in the United States and the rest of the world for that matter. Also there are several court documents, state documents, with your name change that needs to happen in order for you to fully retrieve your trust. Had he been ticketed or his vehicle towed by an uninformed Deputy or Police Officer, the court would release the ticket and give him his "automobile" back with no fees paid. If you are a police officer and you really want to be in Constitutional "law enforcement" you need to work with a County as a Sheriff Deputy, or in my case, a criminal investigator working for the county District Attorney's office. Interesting to say the least...

I am not as yet, but more and more people are becoming State Nationals and withdrawing for the United States Corporations and it's policy enforcement. Remember, ALL cities are corporations and Police Officer work for cities and NOT "unincorporated" areas that are controlled by counties. Take a listen to this gentleman NOT get a ticket or have his unregistered vehicle towed by the "Police" or "policy enforcement officer". It's a tricky dance with English diction in order to not fall into their enforcement jurisdiction. This gentleman handled it perfectly. In order to be a State national you need to change the type of passport you have which will legally allow you to travel freely in the United States and the rest of the world for that matter. Also there are several court documents, state documents, with your name change that needs to happen in order for you to fully retrieve your trust. Had he been ticketed or his vehicle towed by an uninformed Deputy or Police Officer, the court would release the ticket and give him his "automobile" back with no fees paid. If you are a police officer and you really want to be in Constitutional "law enforcement" you need to work with a County as a Sheriff Deputy, or in my case, a criminal investigator working for the county District Attorney's office. Interesting to say the least...

DeepWebSlinger

19,219 views • 7 months ago

This is the state of society today. A man thinks he has the right to access female-only spaces because his feelings were hurt by people not believing he is a woman. Is that not the object of the game? It is not a woman's burden that you have chosen to medicalise yourself, and it is not up to them to act as your human shield. Just stop. I had to edit out the ending of this video because a minor was on camera, and I do not allow that. I said: "I appreciate that, but women shouldn't have to feel uncomfortable for you to feel comfortable. If they continue to challenge you, advise them that you are male or speak to a member of staff." To see the full protest video, I have posted it on my Substack below. If you are interested in supporting me attending these protest please go to the link in the bio or subscribe to the substack.

This is the state of society today. A man thinks he has the right to access female-only spaces because his feelings were hurt by people not believing he is a woman. Is that not the object of the game? It is not a woman's burden that you have chosen to medicalise yourself, and it is not up to them to act as your human shield. Just stop. I had to edit out the ending of this video because a minor was on camera, and I do not allow that. I said: "I appreciate that, but women shouldn't have to feel uncomfortable for you to feel comfortable. If they continue to challenge you, advise them that you are male or speak to a member of staff." To see the full protest video, I have posted it on my Substack below. If you are interested in supporting me attending these protest please go to the link in the bio or subscribe to the substack.

MichaelDPUK 💜🦎

12,815 views • 2 months ago

"This is where Mamdani is a model...There's this narrative that what Democrats have to do in order to win is to take squishy middle positions on everything. I actually disagree with that assessment. I think it's absolutely possible to take almost any position you want. There are kind of two things that are important though: You can't let niche issues that are not the primary concerns of a lot of voters dominate the messaging & the campaign. You need to stay the most focused on what voters actually care about." Musa al-Gharbi

"This is where Mamdani is a model...There's this narrative that what Democrats have to do in order to win is to take squishy middle positions on everything. I actually disagree with that assessment. I think it's absolutely possible to take almost any position you want. There are kind of two things that are important though: You can't let niche issues that are not the primary concerns of a lot of voters dominate the messaging & the campaign. You need to stay the most focused on what voters actually care about." Musa al-Gharbi

Briahna Joy Gray

24,457 views • 3 months ago

🚨BREAKING: A U.S. citizen in, Vancouver, WA, was pulled over by FIVE police cars for legally observing and documenting ICE agents… then had to explain the Constitution to the officers detaining him… And it was all caught on video. In the video, an ICE agent didn’t like being watched, called local police… Then suddenly, the U.S. citizen, exercising his constitutional rights, was surrounded by FIVE cop cars. And most ridiculous part? The officers who claimed “reasonable suspicion” for detaining the U.S. citizen, could not even answer this simple question… Is it legal to observe and record law enforcement? After refusing to answer, and arguing about the First Amendment for several minutes, the officer finally admitted… Yes. It is legal to observe and record law enforcement. So, if it’s a legally protected activity… then why was this U.S. citizen detained? Federal courts, across the country, have repeatedly recognized that the First Amendment protects the right to record and observe government officials… including law enforcement performing their duties in public… as long as you aren’t interfering with them. That means, local police, and ICE agents, don’t get to decide when that right applies… They don’t get to ignore the Constitution because they’re uncomfortable with public oversight. But this isn’t the only incident. Across America, we’re watching local law enforcement work alongside ICE, while ordinary citizens, journalists, and legal observers are being questioned, detained, and intimidated for exercising their constitutional rights. And the fact that a U.S. citizen had to educate the officers, who were detaining HIM, about the Constitution… should outrage every single person. Because if the people enforcing the law don’t understand the constitutional rights they’re sworn to protect… That puts every American in danger.

🚨BREAKING: A U.S. citizen in, Vancouver, WA, was pulled over by FIVE police cars for legally observing and documenting ICE agents… then had to explain the Constitution to the officers detaining him… And it was all caught on video. In the video, an ICE agent didn’t like being watched, called local police… Then suddenly, the U.S. citizen, exercising his constitutional rights, was surrounded by FIVE cop cars. And most ridiculous part? The officers who claimed “reasonable suspicion” for detaining the U.S. citizen, could not even answer this simple question… Is it legal to observe and record law enforcement? After refusing to answer, and arguing about the First Amendment for several minutes, the officer finally admitted… Yes. It is legal to observe and record law enforcement. So, if it’s a legally protected activity… then why was this U.S. citizen detained? Federal courts, across the country, have repeatedly recognized that the First Amendment protects the right to record and observe government officials… including law enforcement performing their duties in public… as long as you aren’t interfering with them. That means, local police, and ICE agents, don’t get to decide when that right applies… They don’t get to ignore the Constitution because they’re uncomfortable with public oversight. But this isn’t the only incident. Across America, we’re watching local law enforcement work alongside ICE, while ordinary citizens, journalists, and legal observers are being questioned, detained, and intimidated for exercising their constitutional rights. And the fact that a U.S. citizen had to educate the officers, who were detaining HIM, about the Constitution… should outrage every single person. Because if the people enforcing the law don’t understand the constitutional rights they’re sworn to protect… That puts every American in danger.

Jesus Freakin Congress

103,571 views • 3 months ago

Please remove your political goggles. Do I have a point here? Example: Kyle Rittenhouse. We defended his right to carry a gun during the summer of love riots/protest. Note: I do not agree with interfering with law-enforcement or aggressively impeding their ability to do their job as I support their efforts to remove criminals off the streets. BUT, I do however support the 2nd amendment. Was it wise to carry a gun to this type of event? No, however, he had right and a permit to do so. Real America's Voice (RAV)

Please remove your political goggles. Do I have a point here? Example: Kyle Rittenhouse. We defended his right to carry a gun during the summer of love riots/protest. Note: I do not agree with interfering with law-enforcement or aggressively impeding their ability to do their job as I support their efforts to remove criminals off the streets. BUT, I do however support the 2nd amendment. Was it wise to carry a gun to this type of event? No, however, he had right and a permit to do so. Real America's Voice (RAV)

Brian Glenn

10,421 views • 8 months ago