MAIG's Top Thug Lies to Slander Concealed Weapon Carrier

[TPaine7]

8. You have misidentified the lawbreaker

Of course it was slander, it was untrue. Having a police report that speaks of "alleged cocaine" is not an excuse for what the mayor said. He is a lying thug. If I had an official report saying that you are an "alleged child molester" I would not be justified in holding a press conference and declaring that you were in fact a child molester. It's hard to believe that you can't see that.

Bloomberg is sophisticated enough to know better. Anyone who reads newspapers and watches news reports knows that. Suspects are not "murderers," "drug dealers," "armed robbers," etc., they are "alleged murderers," "alleged drug dealers," 'alleged armed robbers." No one who owns media companies has the slightest excuse to claim, on the basis of that police report, that the woman had cocaine in her purse.

slander
n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements, such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease or being unable to perform one's occupation, are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much as if not more than printed publications.

Source: http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1969

I agree that a person carrying a gun should know and abide by legitimate laws. The law in the United States is,

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

That is the supreme law of the land. As interpreted by the Fourteenth Amendment and by the Supreme Court, that means that this woman has a constitutional right to carry a gun anywhere in the US.

Unfortunately the Court's understanding, though clearly expressed, occcured in dicta and not in the ruling proper. This is because the Court was not asked to rule on the "bear" part of the Amendment. However, any literate and well informed person who reads Heller, McDonald, or many other Supreme Court cases can see that this woman has a right to carry a gun in New York City.

Bloomberg is a lying thug. He knew better than to besmirch that woman's reputation; he acted out of a deep seated hatred for the right to keep and bear arms. He doesn't like ordinary people being able to defend themselves with arms, though he has no trouble with ordinary people paying taxes to arm his security detail.

He repeats his inane, half-witted one liner—"guns kill people"—yet it apparently never occurs to him that he could disarm the people that spend their time protecting his lying, Constitution defying, hypocrytical, thuggish hide.

New York City's legislature, police force, judges, prosecuters, mayor and prison system broke the law. They continue to break it daliy by enforcing clearly unconstitutional laws. They have no legitimate power to stop any sane, law abiding adult from carrying guns on or about their person in the city.

Instead of concerning ourselves with the violation of New York's little, unconstitutional, illigitmate law, why not worry about the crime lord who is using a corrupt political machine to break the supreme law of the land? Why not focus on the thug who is punishing people for exercising their rights?