ON KEEPING THE PIECE. On behalf of their Authorities liberal doo-gooders are using the Kyle Rittenhouse and Ahmaud Arbery to advocate for freedumb. FUNKTIONARY defines freedumb as:

the state of unrecognized psychological captivity that sheeple remain in because they don't speak the language of reality nor edit truth from perfecting heart to perfecting power--and when truth is spoken around them, refrain from being open, or impervious to it thus being forever chained to its distortions and limitations. 2) the mindset that proposes "since we are liberated, we are also free." 3) the mindset that operates upon the notion that you can have individuality without accountability or responsibility. 4) the pretense that reality is truth and vice-versa. People cherish unwarranted assumptions and relish their freedumb because they have been socialized into self-censorship along with misidentification with the ego-mind--the absence of knowledge of Self. (See: Phfreedom, Truth, Unfreedom, Dumbelievers, Self, Belief Systems, True Self & Reality)

No matter the outcome of either trial white liberals will mindlessly demand less freedom in the form of more gun control and limits on the right of self defense. All weekend pundits and Black drones have been parroting their liberal masters on dependent media, talking about ‘what if Kyle Rittenhouse were Black?’ Fuck that; What if Ahmed Arbery had an AR-15? Would he still be alive?

Disarming law abiding Black people prevents them from being able to defend themselves against criminals and the government. As such, gun controls and gun bans disempower Black people and readily subject Black communities to government and criminal violence, rendering Blacks helpless, solely dependent and slave-like in their relations with government authorities who prey on them and control them under the pretense of protection.

FUNKTIONARY defines “slaves” as “disarmed men and women.” It further explains that a “gun ban” is the precursor to servitude. Enslavement is like old age; it creeps up on you. Banning guns to reduce crime is like banning sex to reduce rape.” [MORE] Contrary to indoctrination from freedumb advocates in the dependent media, the 2nd Amendment is not for primarily for hunting animals or for self-defense from thugs. Rather, it exists for when all other rights have failed. An armed population is necessary to check authority and tyranny. As stated by 9th circuit judge Alex Kozinski,

“tyranny thrives best where government need not fear the wrath of an armed people. Our own sorry history bears this out: Disarmament was the tool of choice for subjugating both slaves and free blacks in the South. In Florida, patrols searched blacks' homes for weapons, confiscated those found and punished their owners without judicial process. In the North, by contrast, blacks exercised their right to bear arms to defend against racial mob violence. As Chief Justice Taney well appreciated, the institution of slavery required a class of people who lacked the means to resist. A revolt by Nat Turner and a few dozen other armed blacks could be put down without much difficulty; one by four million armed blacks would have meant big trouble.

All too many of the other great tragedies of history—Stalin's atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few—were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

. . . The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.” Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F.3d 567, 569-570 (9th Cir. 2003) quoted in FUNKTIONARY

Police prey on Black people and function as our public masters. If a “public servant" is uncontrollable, unaccountable, can’t be hired or fired by you, has irresponsible power over you and provides a compulsory “service” then he is actually your master. Dr. Blynd makes it plain, "people who are awake see cops as mercenary guards that remind us daily through acts of force, that we are simultaneously both enemies and slaves of the Corporate State - colonized, surveilled and patrolled by the desensitized and lobotomized drones of the colonizers." Brazen cops so frequently abuse their uncontrollable powers that no Black driver, pedestrian, shopper, juvenile, adult or Black professional of any kind—could make a compelling argument that so-called 4th Amendment rights afford any meaningful protection from cops. Cops interfere with Black people’s freedom of movement and right to be left alone any time they desire. Black people are more than 55 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist. [MORE] Moreover, Black men are conservatively estimated to be 3 times more likely to be killed by cops than white men. Alex Vitale explains “It is largely liberal fantasy that the police exist to protect us from the bad guys.” In reality, police exist to manage the behavior of Blacks & Latinos within a free-range prison disguised as a democracy. The goal of authority is to place you in greater confinement. Another goal is for Black people to relinquish individual responsibility for defending themselves and to depend upon their public masters to do so in their provision of “public service” that cannot be refused. Discussing authoritarian indoctrination, Larken Rose states,

One of the main problems that the peasants must be trained not to deal with themselves is violent conflict. It is imperative that they view you (and your enforcers) as the only protection against rob­bery, assault, and murder. In short, they must be indoctrinated in such a way that they do not even want to be able to defend them­selves. The reason is simple: if the peasants feel capable and enti­tled to "enforce justice" themselves, they might just decide to enforce a little justice against you. And that obviously won't do. 

They must be trained to give up their belief in their right to defend themselves, which is not an easy thing to do. You must attack "peasant justice" in any ways you can think of, such as: 1) '"Vigilante justice can never be as just or fair as our system"; 2) '"You can't possibly protect yourselves; let us do it"; 3) "If you have a gun. you 'II only hurt yourself: 4) "'If the peasants were allowed to use force, there would be chaos'"; 5) "Private protection agen­cies would just deteriorate into competing gangs of thugs"; and so on. Often privately-enforced justice is referred to as the people "taking the law into their own hands" which reinforces the idea that only enforcers of "the law" should ever use force, and of course the lowly peasants can't be allowed to do that." [MORE]

Anything else cops do, good or bad, is random or incidental to the aforementioned goals.

Here, no matter the outcome of the Kyle Rittenhouse or Ahmed Arbery trials, under the pretense of making Black people safe, liberal authoritarians (and their believers) will mindlessly advocating for more gun control. However, it is obvious that a disarmed public is helpless and even more subject to governmental and thug violence. The idea that an otherwise criminal minded individual will stop himself from committing a violent crime with a gun because new gun laws are created is not rational. Dr. Blynd explains "Those who use guns to "break" (violate) the law [criminals] will have no problem breaking the law to get guns (to commit violent crimes against you). The same people who fear firearms in the hands of the people also fear information in the minds of people. Dr. Blynd asks “If guns supposedly cause (or encourage) crime, why are we arming police officers?" As explained by Larken Rose, “Crime statistics and common sense both demonstrate that passing a “law” against private weapon ownership will effect only the “law-abiding,” with the result being that the basically good people will end up less able to defend themselves against aggressors. And that is exactly what politicians want, because they have the biggest, most powerful gang of aggressors around (cops).”

It is also obvious that the neuropeons who hunted and murdered Mr. Arbery knew he was unarmed and felt free to step to him because of it. Importantly, if Arbery had a gun he might be alive today; obviously a gun would have given him a greater chance at survival.

At any rate, lawful gun possession was not a material legal issue in the Arbery or Rittenhouse case. Arbery’s killers lawfully possessed their weapons. Similarly and contrary to dependent media nonsense, Kyle Rittenhouse also lawfully possessed [he did not purchase it] that AR-15 in Kenosha when he defended himself against white men who assaulted him. As such, the application of gun laws to the Arbery and Rittenhouse trials is more proof that authorities (liberal or conservative) and their jesusized believers will use any contingency as a resource to expand their control over people.

Persons who tell you that having less freedom are selling you slavery. There is obvious inherent tension and hypocrisy between simultaneously being against police abuse and pro-gun control or disarming law abiding Black citizens. The ad-hoc, knee-deep political positions of white liberals and their believers are proof they’re not really concerned with the health, wealth, and mental well-being of black people and their politics are in no way geared to neutralize or destroy the system of racism white supremacy. Rather, liberal politics are solely designed to get out the Black vote and to maintain master-servant relations, the gravamen of the system of racism white supremacy.