CopBlockers Question Police and Expose an Undercover Officer at Gun Protest
Last week I interviewed Brad Jardis about an event he planned for December 9th at Plymouth State University in New Hampshire. To quickly recap, Brad wanted to carry a gun on campus with his friend – Tommy Mozingo – in direct violation to University “law(s)” but was kept from doing so by restraining order. Brad claims the University’s rules are illegal because New Hampshire law states that political sub-divisions canNOT enact laws restricting gun rights of individuals – again see this interview. Today Brad and Tommy will be in court pleading to a judge for their natural right to protect themselves.
The video above is from the event, including several clips that weren’t seen in the mainstream media coverage . Like outing another undercover police officer, who was conceal carrying (and helps cage peaceful marijuana smokers), and the obvious police state. Pete and I went around asking officers to comment on the double standard being presented that day. While Brad and Tommy (along with anyone associating with them) were banned from conducting their protest by the government, via court order. That same government also sent atleast 30+ officers (from all over the state) to protect the campus with FIREARMS. Once again proving that the rules are subjective and rarely apply to those working for big brother. While police will be the first to tell you, “to fight more crime you need more cops.” Yet, they reject the idea that an armed society is a safe society.
And to those that just don’t like guns and fail to see their value in preventing crime – something police claim to do yet fail miserably at – look at this issue from a property rights perspective. Plymouth State University is subsidized by the government, via taxpayers, and therefore is considered “public property.” There’s no way 300 million people would ever agree on a single set of rules for such property. Not to mention the irony in making someone pay for something but limiting their ability to protect themselves – like they can on all other NH public property. Which is why public property must be ended.
If Plymouth State was funding itself by providing the best possible higher learning atmosphere, then the owner(s) of the school could make the decision as to who can carry guns there. Until then, the government will do what’s in its best interest – gain more control of the people by claiming to act in the public’s best interest while slowing stripping you of any means to protecting yourself.
What do you think? Is an armed society a safe society? Why?
