South Carolina citizens demanding changes in “No Gun Zones” laws

Round 1 (Ding- Ding!) South Carolina citizens demanding changes in “No Gun Zones” laws

Cease and Desist —–

Due to public schools being labeled “No Gun Zones”, we, as parents are unable to protect our children at school, South Carolina enforces this statute. When enforcing this law, it removes the most basic right of all human life- the right to survival, as well as the inherent right to protect ourselves, as well as our children.

Further, where any institution removes the duty of care from an individual; both expressly through legislation, or implied through conduct, it takes the duty of care in the absence of the parents.  The duty of care is a legal duty on all individuals and organizations to avoid carelessly causing injury to persons. It requires everything ‘reasonably practicable’ be done to protect the health and safety of our children in public school.

In addition, this breach of duty of care extends to the public school teachers, as well. Whenever a student teacher relationship exists, the teacher has a special duty of care. This is a legal obligation to protect students from injury;
“A teacher is to take such measures as are reasonable in the circumstances to protect a student under the teachers charge from the risks of injury that the teacher could have reasonably foreseen.” (Richards v State of Victoria, 1969)

As part of that duty, teachers are required to supervise students adequately. This requires not only protection from known hazards, but also from those that could arise (those that the teacher could have easily foreseen) and against which preventative measures could have been taken.

• Teachers in breach of duty of care may be liable for injuries inflicted by one student on another, as well as the injuries sustained by the student.

• For a teacher or a school to be held guilty of negligence, it must be proved that the injury was foreseeable result of the action or lack of action. In courts this test is not a demanding one.

• In situations where the teacher should reasonably have foreseen the possibility of injury, the teacher has a duty to take reasonable care.

• The teacher’s duty of care will have a higher expectation as the child’s age is lower.

• Schools are bound by standards which are issued under legislative authority, non compliance with these standards may amount to negligence.

Primary factors to consider in ascertaining whether the person’s conduct lacks reasonable care are the foreseeable likelihood that the person’s conduct will result in harm, the foreseeable severity of any harm that may ensue, and the burden of precautions to eliminate or reduce the risk of harm. See Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Physical Harm § 3 (P.F.D. No. 1, 2005).

Further, negligent conduct may consist of either an act, or an omission to act when there is a duty to do so.  See Restatement (Second) of Torts § 282 (1965).
Four elements are required to establish a prima facie case of negligence:

the existence of a legal duty that the defendant owed to the plaintiff
defendant’s breach of that duty
plaintiff’s sufferance of an injury
proof that defendant’s breach caused the injury (typically defined through proximate cause)
Without regard to the laws of man which protect property, under the law of nature, all people have an inherent right to live, as well as the unalienable right to protect that life.

“Under the law of nature, all men are born free, everyone comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own. This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance.”
– Legal argument in the case of Howell vs. Netherland, April 1770; “The Works of Thomas Jefferson,” Federal Edition, Editor: Paul Leicester Ford, (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5) Vol. 1.

We demand you that you immediately Cease and Desist the enforcement of conceal carry weapons on public school property, as well as the inherent right of parents who, by providing transportation, have an inherent right to defend both their self and their children on public school property.

Related Video:

URGENT: Stasi State, Mental Health & the details of the DRILL!

The Broward Sheriff Israel is calling for expanding “LAW” enforcement authority to DETAIN civilians for general concerns about “mental well-being” This is a STASI tactic. We’ve been neglecting the critical details about these mass carnage events and it’s time to circle back around and demand some answers.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s