Above, Albert attending the fringe at a UKIP conference.
The indefatigable Albert Burgess is a great patriot and a stalwart defender of the British Constitution. Many British Gazette readers will know Albert personally. In today’s article we publish [unedited] his open letter:
FAO: Mr Justice Supperstone
The Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
Ref: The Right To Bear Arms
My Lord,
I understand you have been given the job of hearing a judicial review on the right of Her Majesty’s natural born subjects to bear arms. Whilst not being directly involved in the case before you, I should however appreciate it if you will please consider my opinion and together with any other of Her Majesty’s Judges hearing or having an interest in the case. That eminent Judge Lord Denning said, “If a man comes into your house without the correct paperwork, knock him spark out”. But what if that man has a butchers knife or a gun ? What if he is not on his own ? How then, do we knock him spark out ? Very few of us are trained in the martial arts or have been trained by the SAS. Most of us are just not capable of defending our homes or families. We need our ancient right and duty to bear arms.
There are five types of law in this ancient Kingdom. The first is custom, the second charters, third are those made by the Estates of England, fourth statute. The fifth is common law.
Custom is that law which has been in use and approved by the people from before time of memory. Sir Edward Coke ruled that this included any law which predated King Richard I coming to the Throne, a little over four hundred years before Sir Edward Coke. So before time of memory can be set at any law over four hundred years old.
Charters are things like the Charter of Liberties 1100 or Magna Carta 1215. These are contracts between the King and his subjects. Parliament is not included. The City of London has a Royal Charter as do a number of other places like the Cinque Ports. These are legally enforceable contracts solely between the King and his subjects.
The Estates of England are the highest law giving body in this Kingdom. They have the ability to hire and fire Kings which they did when they effectively fired James II and hired William and Mary with the Declaration of Rights 1689 and in May 1366 they advised King Edward III that he had to refuse tribute to the Pope. It was the Estates of England meeting at Runnymede that forced King John to sign Magna Carta 1215 demanding that he govern us according to our law.
Forth, statues are acts of Parliament. Statues cannot be used to alter, amend or repeal any of the above and are quite simply laws dealing with the day to day running of the Kingdom. Put it like this I go to work to earn money. I give that money to my wife and she administers it buying food clothing and paying the bills. The taxpayer equates to the husband earning the money and Parliament equate to the housewife. They buy what we need, pay the nation’s bills and lay down rules for the day to day running of the Kingdom. Constitutionally, Parliament is a tri-partite agreement where the House of Commons originates legislation, the House of Lords give it approval, send it back with amendment or they reject it outright strictly in accordance with their collective conscience . If it is approved, it goes to the King who strictly in accordance with his own conscience in the best interests of his subjects, will grant or refuse the Royal Assent. If the King refuses the Assent, he cannot be asked or told to give his reasons.
Common Law is made by the courts adapting a statute to the case before them. The Judges interpret the law in such a way that justice can be achieved when it might not be if the statute were applied as written. Common Law is also that law which was common to the entire Kingdom. Such a law states quite clearly that if the French or Turks come into this Kingdom even if the King says he wants them and they are his friends, each of us can become an officer and form a force/militia to throw them out. So English law and custom state that we must hold weapons and be prepared to use them for the defence of ourselves and of the Kingdom.
Custom it has long been the custom not only to permit the carrying of weapons by the King’s subjects, but it was in fact from earliest times a requirement that all freemen must by law equip himself with weapons suitable to his station. The minimum was a broadsword and a long bow. Indeed it is still a legal requirement to this day, that all men between the ages of twelve and sixty do an hour’s practice with the long bow every day. Like many laws it is current legislation that is not enforced. For hundreds of years since the introduction of purely English law by King Alfred, every man over twelve years of age must possess weapons to be used in locally formed militias for the defence of his local town and/or the Kingdom. In later years, this required the larger land owners to supply one or more fully equipped and mounted Knights ready to be sent into battle for the defence of the Kingdom. This was called the Knights fee. Along with Knights, land owners would supply archers and men at arms fully equipped to defend the Kingdom.
Over hundreds of years the longbow was largely replaced with cannon, pistols and rifles. It was the custom for Englishmen to possess and carry swords, daggers and hand held guns – the pistol being the most convenient. The 1689 Bill of Rights which incorporates the Declaration of Rights, states that a Protestant may carry weapons suitable for his defence as allowed by law. Catholics were already carrying them, a clear statement by the Estates of England that the law and custom of England was to have an armed population ready and able to defend both themselves and the Kingdom.
Even today, you cannot be arrested for carrying a longbow, a purely English and Welsh weapon. But if you walk down the street with any part of a crossbow, you will be subject to arrest. The first firearms legislation appeared in 1903 and required people to hold a permit to buy ammunition and carry a loaded weapon in public. In 1919 after the Great War, Government fearing anarchists started to restrict the carrying of firearms. With such ridiculous knee jerk reaction, Government failed to consider that an armed population prepared to resist anarchists would have prevented any anarchists attempting anything and will very effectively have shut them down. Later statutes imposing strict gun control are unlawful. This is because they attempt to repeal the custom and practice of England to have an armed population ready to defend the Kingdom. In 1588 on the approach of the Spanish Armada, Queen Elizabeth I ordered the release of all prisoners because England was their country too and they must be allowed to defend it from invasion.
The present Government are allowing unlimited immigration. This has resulted in very many child rapes and acid attacks, a particularly vile form of assault. It has resulted in no go areas where we understand police officers ask permission to patrol. We are being invaded contrary to the will of Her Majesty’s natural born subjects. As the result, we not only have the right but a clear duty to consider ourselves officers according to our ancient laws and the custom and practice of England to call out militias to defend our children and this ancient Kingdom which we see being overrun by barbarian hordes. And we demand our ancient right to bear arms in the defence of this Kingdom.
No Parliament since 1911 has been a lawfully constituted Parliament. This is because the 1911 Parliament Act breached section 3 of the 1848 Treason Felony Act and overawed the House of Lords common law cognisance to conduct its own business its own way. It was a clear act of treason contrary to the above Act. The 1949 Parliament Act made the situation worse and the 1999 House of Lords Act overawed the House of Lords common law cognisance to decide who does and does not sit in the Upper House. As a result all firearms Acts passed since 1911 are void as they were not made by a properly constituted Parliament as laid down in our constitutional and common law.
Sir Edward Coke CJ ruled that “Parliament may sometimes pass a law which is repugnant, against common right and reason or impossible to perform in which case the Common Law will intercede and strike it down”. I respectfully submit that it is against common right and reason to disarm the Queen’s loyal subjects so they are no longer able to defend the Realm. It is repugnant that such disarmament should occur and if Her Majesty’s loyal subjects decided to arm themselves in defence of Her Majesty and this Kingdom, it would be impossible to disarm them. Stonor CJ said that, “Law is that which is right”. It is not right to have a population disarmed so that they are unable to defend the Kingdom. Beresford CJ said, “There is no such thing as a bad law, because if it is bad it is not law” It is bad law to expose the Kingdom to risk by having an unarmed population.
I most respectfully submit that to disarm and keep Her Majesty’s natural born subjects disarmed breaches our common law right in conformation with the custom and practice of England. To bear arms suitable to defend ourselves and this ancient Kingdom. I further submit that every firearms act since 1903 has no lawful validity because they all breach our common law right to bear arms suitable to our station and the custom and practice of England.
Government have so reduced the Kingdom’s armed forces that they are unable to defend the Kingdom they serve, from invasion. Government’s reduction of the number of police officers has left our police forces in every part of the country vulnerable to riot, riot of such size and violence that the police on their own will be entirely overwhelmed. Several riots occurring across the nation would stretch our police to breaking point and far beyond. The Armed Forces, the natural back up for the civilian police, are so depleted and already overstretched with peace keeping and overseas operations fighting terrorists that there is every prospect that an armed attacking force going to war against Her Majesty’s natural born subjects will see our police and armed forces totally overwhelmed by sheer weight of numbers.
We have in Britain a rapidly growing and volatile group of Muslim Judaists determined to cause death and destruction on our streets. We know from experience in mainland Europe that they are not frightened to attack police as they destroy large parts of the cities across Europe and Scandinavia. Greek customs officials opened containers purportedly containing furniture donated to Muslim refugees. Instead of furniture, they found containers of military grade weapons and ammunition. Police raids on Mosques in France and Germany have exposed considerable quantities of military grade weapons. Our own police have already conspired to cover up the rape and prostitution of our young school girls as young as 11 years of age. Until retiring, I held the office of constable and to my eternal shame, I watched a video of Metropolitan police officers running away from a mob of Muslims. I cringe with the shame of it. I always ran toward the problem, no matter how many there were causing it.
My Lord, you have the opportunity to restore what is right and to allow Her Majesty’s natural born subjects with a clean criminal record and of sound mental health, the right to possess weapons suitable for our defence and the defence of the Realm. I would suggest a rifle not capable of fully automatic fire and a handgun such as a semi automatic pistol. A requirement for owning these weapons should be attendance at a police or military range to be taught how to safely handle the chosen weapon and to ensure accuracy in its use. This would provide an easily assembled militia who would operate under the orders of a military officer in support of the police. If the weapon of choice used the same calibre of ammunition used by the military and police – for rifles 7.62 or point 22/ 5.56 calibre round and 9mm for all hand guns so that the militia can be supplied with ammunition easily from military or police stocks.
We see marches through our towns of many thousands of Muslims complete with banners and with cars blaring out the dirge they shout. It is my fear based upon what is happening across Europe that it is only a matter of time before marches become riots. Police officers present will be killed before further police backup can arrive and the Muslims will set out on a rape and murder binge where every man is murdered and every woman and child is brutally beaten and raped. If British natural born subjects were armed, the police would receive instant support and the militia acting under police instruction could contain the situation until armed police and or military units arrive to deal effectively with such major breach to the Queen’s peace.
My Lord, the United States (US) are like us. They are a common law country that took our law. Those parts of the US which have strict gun control also have the highest rates of serious crime and murder. Those parts of the US where people are allowed to carry firearms, concealed or openly, have significantly lower rates of crime and very few murders. When crime does occur, armed citizens are able to take the criminals into custody and hold them until police arrive. If you check these facts as being one of Her Majesty’s impartial Judges I hope you will, you will find the argument for armed subjects is compelling. Please remember, criminals do not respect the law which is why they are criminals and more and more of them carry guns, even fully automatic machine pistols. They ‘need’ fully automatic weapons because they are not trained in the use of firearms. Her Majesty’s natural born subjects armed and trained with the weapons they have, they can effectively save lives, take down the criminal element and contain the situation until the police arrive.
Respectfully submitted for your consideration.
Albert Burgess
Speaking the Truth unto the Nation
