imported post
I do see that the Virginia Declaration of Rights/Bill of Rights under Article 1 §1 states:
"That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people, that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them."
So the people or the citizen are supreme in Virginia, not the governor, not the police, not the legislature, and not the judicial department.
The Declaration of Rights goes on to state under Article 1 §3:
"That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people..."
It doesn't say that the purpose is to protect the people's servants the police, but that government is instituted to protect the people or the citizens themselves.
The Declaration of Rights under Article 1 § 6 states:
[a]nd that all men....cannot be taxed
or deprived of their property for public uses,
without their own consent...
This article is buttressed by Article 1 §1:
That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
The government's safety or its agents safety is specifically rejected by this article.
[size="+1"]" Our Bill of Rights is a part of our Constitution ; and the general principles thereby declared are Fundamental Laws, except so far as they are modified by the Constitution itself. They limit the powers of the Legislature, and prohibit the passing any Law violating those principles. The first Article of this declares: "That all men are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot by any compact deprive or divest their posterity, namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." To deprive a citizen of any property already legally acquired, without a fair compensation, deprives him quoad hoc, of the means of possessing property, and of the only means, so far as the Government is concerned, besides the security of his person, of obtaining happiness. Liberty itself consists essentially, as well in the security of private property, as of the persons of individuals; and this security of private property is one of the primary objects of Civil Government, which our ancestors, in framing our Constitution, intended to secure to themselves and their posterity, effectually, and for ever." [/size][size="+1"] Crenshaw v. Slate River Co., 6 Rand. (27 Va.) 245 (1828).[/size]
Article I § 13:
That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
The safety and security of the Commonwealth is vested in a well regulated militia composed of the body of the people, and therefore the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It does not say that the safety and security is vested in a standing army or in any force whether they be called Hessian, Mercenary, or State police. The right specifically rejects such a notion.
"Mr. Chairman—A worthy member has asked, who are the militia, if they be not the
people, of this country, and if we are not to be protected from the fate of the Germans, Prussians, &c. by our representation? I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor; but may be confined to the lower and middle classes of the people, granting exclusion to the higher classes of the people. If we should ever see that day, the most ignominious punishments and heavy fines may be expected. Under the present government all ranks of people are subject to militia duty." - George Mason, June 16, 1788.
"[t]hat it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person..." Thomas Jefferson, 1824.
The Right to Self Preservation
"3d. That government ought to be instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people; and
that the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive to the good and happiness of mankind." Declaration of Rights Proposed by Virginia to the United States Constitution at the
Virginia Ratification Debates on the United States Constitution. June 27, 1788.
"That the good People of Virginia took up Arms, in the present Contest with Great Britain, in Defence of their Liberty and Property, invaded by an arbitrary & tyrannical Government; that as it is not merely for Names, but our essential Rights we are contending, the same Principles which first induced us to draw the Sword will again dictate Resistance to Injustice & Oppression, in whatever Shape, or under whatever Pretence, it may be offered...Certain we are, that the People will never submit to have their Property seized, for the Maintenance of a Set of Men, sent hither for the avowed Purpose of plundering, murdering, or enslaving us....Your Petitioners conceive that the Enormity & Tyranny of these Proceedings can hardly be parralled in the most despotic Governments; and that, without exemplary Punishment upon the Guilty, a Man can have no Security in his Property; or must be reduced to the fatal Necessity of punishing the Aggressor with his own Hand; as in a State without Laws, every Man has a Right to do." George Mason, December 10, 1781.
"The right to resist an unlawful arrest has existed, in some form, at common law for over 300 years. Its origins may be traced to the Magna Charta in 1215,20 but it was not until The Queen v. Tooley21 that the right was clearly established by judicial decision."
Resisting Unlawful Arrest in Mississippi: Resisting the Modern Trend, 2 Cal. Crim. L. Rev. 2. (2000).
Clearly if you give up your gun to an agent of the state in this case a constable, you have effectually given up your right to resist an unlawful arrest or the use of excessive force. Giving up your means of self-defense and self preservation are not the actions of a free man but that of a slave. "We owe our mother-country the duty of subjects but will not pay her the submission of slaves. "George Mason, 1770.
"The court fully protected the rights of the accused on this point by instructions Nos. 34 and 41, which told the jury, in substance,
that when an officer attempts to arrest a person charged with a felony and uses more force than is reasonably necessary to make the arrest, the officer himself becomes the wrongdoer and the person whose arrest is sought, if himself without fault, can resist such excessive force and even kill the officer if necessary to preserve his own life." Palmer v. Commonwealth 143 Va. 592, 130 S.E. 398 (1925).