The following is a recording of a confrontation between groups in a world without law:

[facebook.com]

Those who are claiming authority to be in each group in confrontation with the opposing group are misinformed about the law.

Group A: Riot Control

Group B: Rioters (Black Lives Matter)

Black Lives Mattered:

“A jury of twelve local farmers, all men and all white according to Levinson, rule in favor of Freeman in 1781, giving her freedom and awarding her 30 shillings in damages.”
UPDATED:APR 3, 2019, ORIGINAL:MAR 22, 2019
Meet Elizabeth Freeman, the First Enslaved Woman to Sue for Her Freedom—and Win
Nearly 80 years before the Dred Scott decision, a midwife used the Massachusetts constitution to fight for her liberty.
ABIGAIL HIGGINS
[history.com]

“Around the same time that "Mum Bett" and Brom won their freedom in Berkshire County, another case was working its way through the Massachusetts courts. In the spring of 1781, an enslaved man named Quok Walker had sued for his freedom in Worcester. Walker had run away. When his master found him, he beat him and locked him up for several hours. Walker brought charges for assault and battery. Jurors who heard the case left no record of their reasoning, but they decided that Quok Walker should be free.”

“This was not the end of the matter. The case continued for several years, involving civil and criminal charges and appeals. The constitutionality of slavery was clearly raised when the last appeal was heard in April 1783. It was during this trial that Chief Justice William Cushing told the jury: "All men are born free and equal: and . . . every subject is entitled to liberty; and to have it guarded by the laws. . . .Perpetual servitude can no longer be tolerated in our government. . . . " The jury agreed, confirming Quok Walker's right to freedom.”
August 22, 1781
Jury Decides in Favor of Elizabeth "Mum Bett" Freeman
[massmoments.org]

The Law (actual not fake) involves peaceful means to peaceful ends.

Fake Law (counterfeit) involves violent means to violent ends.

Yelling "Black Lives Matter" in a confrontation with an army of armed people charged with the duty to secure and defend life, liberty, and property, to defend people, places, and defend peaceful coexistence from paid rioters or misguided protesters caught up in league with paid rioters - yelling slogans - leaves me to believe that neither side understands the law, how the law has escaped our social fabric, and therefore leaves me to believe that either side are in need of knowing the peaceful means to peaceful ends in this, or any, confrontation.

The paid rioters (seen often enough in video evidence by unpaid reporters) can be traced back to those who pay them. Those who pay the paid rioters can be given a court date for the opportunity to explain before The People, in a Court of Law, why payments are transfered to rioters, and The Country (the people) can adjudicate the matter, to find judgment for or against someone paying people to riot.

A name of the accused is on an invitation (presentment/indictment) to state the reasons why the accused was found to be paying people to riot, and the people as one (represented by independent jurors in a jury: stacking a jury is a common law crime) decide if that is a crime or not, as the 12 white men did in the 1781 slavery case.

When, on the other hand, writing "declarations of independence," or notices of liability, or even commercial and military lean rights, or solemn notices of mixed war, are the slogans turned into legal actions, then this mob is bound by peaceful means to peaceful ends, due process of law, rejecting aggressive violence, and turning instead to rule of law. That lawful polarized mob of people bound together into that law abiding mob are bound by the clear and present dangers threatening them by the opposition. The opposition to the peaceful mob are the others who falsely claim that their duty is the same thing: defend life, liberty, and property, but that opposition mob is made up of paid assassins and the criminals paying them. That criminal mob, hiding behind fake authority, demonstrates that they are assassins, as they routinely assassinate innocent people: doing so for power and profit. The plot thickens to a point of general confusion among the masses of people that constitute the whole body known as The People, when so many misguided mobs are paid or fooled into resorting to violence, while peaceful means to solve disputes are at everyones fingertips, lacking only the knowledge of it.

So which power works best at polarizing The People for each other rather than against each other?

If that power is accurate accountability of the facts that matter in each case, then we the people may be on the brink of a demonstration of that power, even if that power is grossly misapplied.

As it was with a criminal engaged in human trafficking in 1781, and then again in another case of institutionalized human trafficking on trial before the people in a Court of Law in 1783, Americans may see another case, in a series of related cases, cases that could include the Assassination of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., Robert Kennedy, a host of "whistle-blowers" since, the Assassination of the Weaver Family, the more resent assassination of Lavoy Finicum, the Character Assassination of a Nick Sandmann, and now to the brink of a new case with Kyle Rittenhouse.

As it was when only 2 slaves were set free, and the people in a jury set those slaves free, there is the matter of what happens to convicted human traffickers that appears to escape the minds of otherwise moral people.

Cases in view:

1. Elizabeth Freeman, set free by a jury, human trafficker pays a fine, 1781 (common law trial by jury)
2. Quok Walker set free in 1783, no further details available to me at this time
3. John F. Kennedy, no trial, assassination 1963
4. Martin Luther King Jr., assassination April 4, 1968, the government is convicted of conspiracy murder by a jury (30 years too late) in 2000.
5. Robert Kennedy, no trial, assassination June 6, 1968
6. Karen Silkwood (1974) to Jeffery Epstein, with Maxwell and Assange on the chopping block, no trials.
7. Weaver Family, 1993, trial by jury, expensive attorney, victim tried and set free by jury, no trial for conspiracy murderers.
8. Lavoy Finicum, 2016, murdered by government agents.
9. Nick Sandmann, settles out of court, undisclosed payoff, criminals continue libel on other victims
10. Kyle Rittenhouse is persecuted by criminals pretending to be the government, the government and media criminals responsible for inciting riots are free to continue doing so without risk of prosecution.

Case after case the law is misapplied for lack of knowledge.

1. The human traffickers are always a public menace, more so when they take over governments, and as such, as clearly treasonous criminals, they should face the proper indictment, to be held to account for their treasonous crimes by their victims, and by those who stand in defense of their victims.

2. Also a case of misapplied knowledge as the obvious case of treasonous criminals running amok in the government (subsidizing the slave trade, for power and profit) allows the criminals the leverage to enforce their crimes upon the people and make the people pay for the cost of doing so, because the criminals are in positions of judgment: clearly against the common law. The common law affords The People (juries) the power of adjudication, which is the basis of the revolutionary cause.

3, 4, and 5. 3 Conspiracy Murders by criminals in government in which the actual law power could have saved the lives of the 2 later murders had the power of law arrested the first murderers, offering them their day in court to state their case as to why they murdered John Kennedy. What would our world be like if the law worked and Martin Luther King Jr., and Bobby Kennedy survived? Not a good enough question? What would our world be like had the criminals not taken over in 1789, and the African Slave trade was ended in that year, for good?

6. Whistle-blowing, holding to account the worst criminals running amok and rioting in the blood of the innocent, is the law, so clearly when those claiming to be the law are assassinating whistle-blowers, there is a case to act in defense of the innocent from the guilty, our actions in defense - utilizing the law - is warranted clearly enough for those who have eyes to see, ears to hear, and voices to speak.

7. The victim of a mass-murder, serial murder spree, is on trail, is acquitted by a jury, because so much money is invested in the case, while the mass murderers are free to move onto another crime scene, and they did, they went to Waco, Texas. The victim is paid off, the criminals are free to continue their crime spree, serial murderers, as they wear fake badges, thereby treasonous serial murderers, added to non-feasance, misfeasance, and malfeasance.

8. How many of the culprits in the Weaver Family and Waco Massacre Conspiracy Murders were "on the job" hunting down and murdering Lavoy Finicum, for the "crime" of blowing the whistle? Where is the law? Not the law doing the murdering, where is the real Law?

9. Serial Libelers, serial brainwashers, serial propagandists, treasonous mind-controllers, false-advertisers, pay-off one of their victims, and those treasonous criminals are free to continue doing what? 1. Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud, 2. National Treasonous Subsidized Riots (who do you think is paying those rioters?)

10. Up to date. What next? You be the judge.