Comments by "Dragon F" (@dragonf1092) on "Queen City News" channel.

No legal warrant,and didn't have her consent,her roommates consent is null because they threatened to kidnap her person to gain consent. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
2
They shouldn't have entered the house without a legal lawful warrant in the first place.
2
And their threat to kidnap her person to gain entry nullified her roommates consent. Making it a illegal home invasion, therefore she was justified in firing upon them in her right of self defense. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
2
What only cops have a right to fear for their lives. They had no legal lawful search warrant, they did not have legal lawful consent to enter her home. His consent was null and void the second they threatened to kidnap her person. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
2
A reasonable official would have known that the law barred this entry. Any government official can be held to know that their office does not give them an unrestricted right to enter people's homes at will. Any type of communication which conveys the idea to the person that they have no realistic alternative, but to allow entry negates any claim that the entry was lawfully gained through the channel of consent. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
2
Title 18 U.S.C. section 242 deprivation of rights under color of law. Whoever under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom willfully subjects any person in any state, territory, commonwealth, possession, or district to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the constitution or laws of the united states... Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, to threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping, or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life or both, or may be sentenced to death. Title 18 U.S.C. section 241 conspiracy against rights. If Two or more person's conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any state, territory, commonwealth, possession, or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any rights or privileges secured to him by the constitution or laws of the united states, or because of his having so exercised the same... They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping, or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life or both, or may be sentenced to death. They did not have her consent to enter her home,if they did not have a legal lawful search warrant,she was legally justified in firing upon them in self defense. Her roommate and all officers involved should be arrested, charged, and prosecuted under the legal law. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
2
Any government official passing or enforcing any form of gun laws in the united states of America are guilty of felony conspiracy against rights and felony deprivation of rights under color of law in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. §241,§242.
1
How they illegally entered the house.
1
If they didn't have a legal lawful search warrant or her consent to enter her home,than no it's not justified. They should all be charged and prosecuted under title 18 U.S.C. sections 241 and 242. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@texanlady4 yes they did break the law if they make any kind of threat they negate all form of consent. Say a cop comes to your door they ask to see you,and your wife answers the door and they say if she doesn't let them in they will kick the door down and arrest her that is a threat they negate consent. Well the second they threatened her to her of kidnapping her person roommate they negated consent and since they had no legal lawful search warrant to enter the house renders it a illegal entry,no different than any other home invasion, therefore legally under the legal law she had full legal lawful right to open fire on them as she lawfully has in any other home invasion. Therefore it is a illegal homicide. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@texanlady4 actually I have very clear understanding of the legal law. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
What crimes did she commit U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
If she died they should be charged with homicide, they should also be charged under title 18 U.S.C. sections 241 and 242, they had no legal lawful search warrant to legally enter her home,or her consent. His consent was null and void because they threatened to kidnap her person to gain access to her home. Therefore she was legally justified to fire upon them as in any illegal home invasion. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
No Congressmen, senator, governor judge, president has any legal lawful constitutional authority or jurisdiction whatsoever anywhere in the united states of America to pass or enforce any form of gun laws whatsoever anywhere in the united states of America period they are all state officials and therefore prohibited from doing so under the 14th amendment section 1 no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states clause.
1
She feared for her life,defended herself and her property. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
Did they have a legal lawful search warrant, did she give them permission. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
Obviously she didn't consent to them coming into her home. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@NoName-lo3lu the second they made threats that nullifies all consent. They threatened to kidnap her from where she has a lawful right to be her home,she doesn't have to talk to or socialize with them if she doesn't want to,she made that very clear she wanted no contact with them when she told him to tell them she is sleeping, they had no legal lawful search warrant signed by a judge giving them authority to enter said home or seize her person therefore violating the warrant clause and their oaths of office which is a crime under title 18 U S.C. section 241 conspiracy against rights, title 18 U.S.C. section 242 deprivation of rights under color of law, title 5 U.S.C. sections 3331,3333,7311, and title 18 U.S.C. section 1918. Perjury in violating oath of office which is treason and a felony. Because it was a illegal unconstitutional search and seizure they should all be charged and prosecuted for homicide. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@NoName-lo3lu involuntary papers for involuntary hospitalization(kidnapping) are not a legal lawful search warrant. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@NoName-lo3lu title 18 U.S.C. section 241 conspiracy against rights, title 18 U.S.C. section 242 look them up read and learn them. Title 5 U.S.C. section 7311, title 18 U.S.C. section 1918. Especially 7311 section (5). A warrant is very relevant,4th amendment of the constitution of the united states of America, shall not be violated, probable cause is only to get a legal lawful search warrant. And the 14th amendment section 1,as well as article 4 section 2 paragraph 1 of the constitution of the united states of America supreme law of the land. U.C. C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@NoName-lo3lu because they had no legal lawful search warrant, and they negated all consent by threatening her with assault and violence , kidnapping, that makes it a illegal home invasion, like any other home invasion she had full legal right to fire on them as in any other home invasion. Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrong doer and may be resisted by the use of force as in self defense. State V. Mobley,240 N.C. 476,835. P2D 100. An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery. State V. Robinson 145 M.E. 77,72 ATL. 260. Citizen may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officers life if necessary. Plumber V. State,136 IND. 306. One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped, or kidnapped. This it is not a offense to liberate one from unlawful custody of an officer. Even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance. Adams V. State,121 GA. 16,48 S.E. 910. When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be,is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force and if in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified. Article 4 section 2 paragraph 1 The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states. 14th amendment section 1 All person's born or naturalized in the united states, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the united states and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states; Amendment 4 constitution of the united states of America supreme law of the land. The right of the people to be secure in their person's, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized. Equal protection under the law. 18 U.S.C. 1918. Whoever violates the provisions of section 7311 of title 5 that individual may not accept or hold a position in the government of the united states or the government of the district of Columbia if he (1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government [and] shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year and a day or both. 7311(5) Knowing membership with the specific intent of furthering the aims of, or adherence to and active participation in any foriegn or domestic organization, association, movement, group or combination of person's (herein after referred to as organizations) which unlawfully advocates or practices the commission of acts of force or violence to prevent others from exercising their rights under the constitution or laws of the united states or of any state, or which seeks to overthrow the government of the united states or any state or subdivision thereof by unlawful means. They violated her constitutionally protected rights (liberties). U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@NoName-lo3lu YouTube and Google are a business, bound under U.C.C.
1
Did they have a warrant. If not charge and prosecute them under title 18 U.S.C. section 242. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
The consent to enter the house is null and void, because it was given under threat. They threatened to kidnap her. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@stevejones6802 they broke the law, they did not have a legal lawful search warrant to enter the house, they didn't have her consent to enter the house, they threatened to kidnap her to the roommate which legally nullifies all consent to enter the house. They are in violation of title 18 U.S.C. sections 241 conspiracy against rights and title 18 U.S.C. section 242 deprivation of rights under color of law. She was justified in firing upon them. If she died all officers involved including the roommate should be charged with homicide. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@stevejones6802 when a officer makes any kind of threat all form of consent is null. The officers threatened to kidnap her person. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@stevejones6802 any time a officer makes any form of a threat they negate all consent. The second they threatened to her roommate that they would kidnap her person they negated any form of consent. They had no legal lawful warrant, therefore making it a illegal home invasion,she had full legal lawful right to open fire and defend herself and her home. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@trumptheworstpresidentever4881 title 18 U.S.C. section 241 conspiracy against rights, title 18 U.S.C. section 242 deprivation of rights under color of law. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@ericnichol6767 if the officer makes any kind of threat it negates any form of consent. The second they threatened to kidnap her person they negated the roommates consent letting them in, they had no legal lawful search warrant therefore making it a unlawful entry,no different than any other home invasion, legally under the law she had full legal lawful authority to open fire on them as in any other home invasion exercising her right of self defense. Making the police guilty of homicide. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@ericnichol6767 here's a example,the same applies with any American citizen and situation. If a police officer says "if you don't let us in your home we will break down your door"a parent who then opens the door has not given free and voluntary consent. If a social worker says if you don't let me in the home "I will take your children away". A parent who then opens the door has not given free and voluntary consent. If a social worker says "I will call the police if you do not let me in""negate consent*. Any type of communication which conveys the idea to the parent that they have no realistic alternative, but to allow entry negates any claim that the entry was gained through the channel of consent.
1
@ericnichol6767 a reasonable official would have known that the law barred this entry. Any government official can be held to know that their office does not give them an unrestricted right to enter people's homes at will.
1
@shawnnance3670 proper term is called a kill zone,not fatal funnel.they set themselves up in a kill zone a limited space with limited movement one way to advance or retreat, they should have used a riot shield as protection when they assaulted her in her house in case she had a weapon. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@ericnichol6767 the second they threatened that they were going to get her and escort her to mental health (kidnap her person), they negated all consent. All citizens have the right to not be harassed or terrorized by government officials,she clearly didn't want to have any contact with the officers and didn't Consent for them to enter or talk to them which is her right (liberty)to do so. So yes legally they did need a legal lawful search warrant to enter her home. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@grodriguez512 it's been ruled that if officials make any form of threats that consent is nullified, they did not gain consent through the legal channel of consent. The second that officer made the threat to kidnap her person and force her they nullified all consent, because they gained it through force and threat. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@lt4753 no we need more people who actually look up and know the legal constitutional law. Not dumb brainwashed indoctrinated slaves. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
@lt4753 do what too break the law as they are doing.
1
If the female suspect died all officers involved and the roommate should be charged with homicide. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
The whole felon B.S. is unconstitutional therefore illegal it is a violation of and complete contradiction of article 4 section 2 paragraph 1 and the 14th amendment section 1 no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states clause combined with the second amendment of the constitution of the united states of America period
1
And these are bad cops. They had no legal lawful search warrant,or her consent to enter the house,her roommates consent was nullified the second they threatened to kidnap her person to gain access to the home. She was legally justified in firing upon them as she would be in any other home invasion, and her right of self defense. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1
Nope. They violated the law, they illegally entered her home without a legal lawful search warrant or her consent, she's justified in defending herself from them. His consent is null and void because they threatened to kidnap her person to gain his consent. Her home she doesn't have to tell them jack 💩. They should be arrested, charged, and prosecuted under title 18 U.S.C. section 241 and 242,if she died the roommate should be charged as well. U.C.C. 1-308 all rights reserved with extreme prejudice, Freedom of speech.
1