Tag: self defense

Italy Once Conquered the World, Today Citizens Aren’t Allowed to Defend Themselves

Watching the news and conservative social media feeds from Italy, one sees that migrant crime has exploded across the country. Even global tourism destinations such as Rome have become unsafe at night, while robberies and other violent or sex-related crimes are occurring at an alarming rate, even during the day.

For two thousand years, Rome projected power across three continents, building an empire on the discipline of its legions and the authority of its law. Today, Italy is being overrun with invaders, and an Italian citizen who fights back against a criminal in their own home or shop faces a mandatory criminal investigation and often a prison sentence longer than the one handed to the person who attacked them.

Gun ownership is highly restricted, castle laws are virtually nonexistent, and even the police are discouraged from defending themselves or using force to apprehend noncompliant criminals.

Under the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure, any use of lethal or serious force against an intruder or attacker automatically triggers an “iscrizione nel registro degli indagate,” a formal entry into the register of criminal suspects. Prosecutors typically open the case as manslaughter or “eccesso colposo di legittima difesa” (culpable excess in self-defense), pending forensic and ballistic review.

A 2019 reform, Law no. 36/2019, was intended to strengthen self-defense rights, establishing that proportionality between defense and offense is presumed inside one’s home or business. In practice, judges continue to draw a hard line: force used against an active, ongoing threat is defensible; force used against a suspect who is already fleeing is not, and courts have consistently classified the latter as excessive or even as an act of vengeance.

American laws are generally much more favorable toward self-defense and the defense of one’s home. California Penal Code section 198.5, a “castle doctrine” statute, gives homeowners a legal presumption of reasonable fear once an intruder has forcibly entered, shifting the burden onto prosecutors to disprove that fear.

Italian law, even after 2019, still requires the defender to establish that danger was actual and the response proportionate, case by case. Separately, 38 U.S. states have “stand your ground” laws removing any duty to retreat anywhere a person is lawfully present. Italy has no equivalent.

Keep reading

Elderly Italian man sentenced to life in prison for defending his family against thugs…


Something disgraceful and horrific just went down in Italy, and you need to know about it because many decent, law-abiding Italians believe this was a brazen and heartless move by the “communist” wing of their government.

It all started when a decent, law-abiding man who owned a jewelry store, about 31 miles from Turin, was confronted by robbers.

There’s a moment during every violent crime when the victim has no idea whether he and his family are going to live or die. At that moment, the bad guys control all of it, and every decision is made in a split second.

Later, from the safety of a courtroom, judges can slow everything down, examine each movement, and decide exactly when the danger supposedly ended. It’s basically armchair quarterbacking of a dangerous and scary situation.

An Italian man by the name of Mario Roggero is now going to prison for the rest of his life because Italy’s highest court decided he crossed the line.

The 72-year-old jeweler had worked for nearly half a century without a criminal record. Then three men entered his family’s jewelry store, threatened everyone inside, tied up his daughter, and fled with money and jewelry. Roggero followed them into the parking lot and opened fire, killing two and wounding the third.

Keep reading

Armed Self-Defense Incidents Show Why Second Amendment is Worth Safeguarding

For many supporters of the Second Amendment, it’s been easy in recent weeks to despair over the ways in which gun control advocates are successfully undermining the right to keep and bear arms. Virginia’s ban on future sales of standard-capacity magazines and so-called assault weapons is set to take effect on July 1, with state courts thus far appearing reluctant to intervene. New York and Connecticut became the latest states to pass “Glock bans,” which prohibit residents from buying one of the nation’s most widely available handgun brands.  

But not everything has been doom and gloom for lawful gun owners in other parts of the United States. The last few weeks have also featured some bright spots. In West Virginia, for example, law-abiding 18-to-20-year-olds may now enjoy their right to bear arms on equal footing with all other adults after legislation passed in April to expand the state’s permitless-carry protections finally went into effect. Down in Florida, meanwhile, state Attorney General James Uthmeier joined forces with Second Amendment advocacy groups, agreeing with them that the state’s mandatory three-day waiting period on gun purchases is unconstitutional and asking a federal court to strike down the law. And the Second Circuit struck down New York’s “vampire rule” in what is almost certainly a precursor to the Supreme Court’s imminent decision in Wolford v. Lopez regarding Hawaii’s version of the rule.

All of these are victories for the right to keep and bear arms, which Americans rely on to defend themselves and others far more often than many people realize. Even the notoriously anti-gun Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has acknowledged that most studies on the issue find that between 500,000 and several million defensive gun uses occur every year in the United States. An extensive 2021 national survey conducted by a Georgetown professor further substantiated this reality, concluding that Americans used their firearms defensively an average of 1.2 million times a year.

Keep reading

Europe’s Suicide Pact: Citizens Double-Victimised by Savage Migrants AND a Traitor State That Protects the Butchers

Western Europe is no longer a continent — it’s a slaughterhouse where law-abiding citizens are hunted like animals by imported barbarians, then thrown in prison by their own governments for the “crime” of fighting back.

This is the new normal under the globalist EU regime: an explosion of Third World barbarism enabled by open borders, lunatic judges, and spineless politicians who have declared war on their own people.

The Barbarism Tsunami Nobody in Brussels Wants to Admit

Official Eurostat numbers don’t lie, no matter how hard the mainstream media tries to bury them:

  • Sexual violence offenses in the EU jumped 94.2% between 2014 and 2024.
  • Rapes alone skyrocketed 150.4%.
  • In 2024 alone: 256,302 sexual violence cases and 98,190 rapes — up another 5-7% from the previous year.

Knife crime? Off the charts. Murders rising. In Germany, non-Germans (just 16% of the population) make up 40-50% of violent crime suspects in major states. The data is overwhelming and irrefutable: mass, uncontrolled migration from failed Islamic and African nations = imported medieval savagery.

Real-world horror stories that the elite dismiss as “isolated incidents”

Belfast, June 2026: Sudanese asylum shopper Hadi Alodid, fresh off the Paris-Dublin migrant express, stabs a man dozens of times in the head, neck, and back with a kitchen knife. The victim loses an eye. Riots erupt. Predictable “mental health” excuses incoming.

Aschaffenburg, Germany, January 2025: A failed Afghan asylum seeker butchers a 2-year-old boy in a park, then hacks a 41-year-old hero trying to protect children. Toddler and others left fighting for life. The killer declared “not responsible” and sent for taxpayer-funded therapy while grieving parents are destroyed forever.

Solingen, August 2024: Syrian “refugee” goes on an ISIS-inspired knife rampage at a “diversity festival,” slaughtering three and wounding eight more by trying to slit their throats. “Life” sentence — too late for the victims.

Villach, Austria, 2025: Another Syrian “asylum seeker,” 23, radicalized and loyal to ISIS, stabs one dead and critically injures five.

Germany alone saw 29,000 knife crimes in 2025 — roughly 80 per day. This isn’t “crime.” This is conquest by blade.

Meanwhile, the State Hunts the Victims Who Dare Defend Themselves

While savage migrants get catch-and-release, therapy, and lenient sentences, European citizens who arm themselves or fight back are treated like terrorists.

Pepper spray? Illegal or heavily restricted in the UK, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, and more. In France, even Category D items like knives or tear gas can land you fines up to €15,000 and a year in prison if you’re caught carrying them without a “legitimate reason.”

Keep reading

Tennessee lawmakers pass bill allowing deadly force to defend property

In Tennessee, a stolen item could soon cost someone their life under a bill that’s now headed to the governor’s desk.

The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Kip Capley (R-Summertown) and Sen. Joey Hensley (R-Hohenwald) would allow people to use deadly force to protect their property if they believed they had no other option and there was a serious threat to human safety.

“Right now under current law, if someone is breaking into your property, if they’re stealing from you, if they’re destroying what you’ve worked your entire life to build, you’re expected to wait,” Capley said. “You’re expected to hesitate. You’re expected to second-guess and take a calculated risk at defending what’s yours.”

Democrats pushed back on the legislation.

“The reason we were taught you don’t kill people over property is because they are not putting at risk an innocent human life,” Rep. Justin Pearson (D-Memphis) said. “What this legislation seems to be doing is lowering that threshold significantly and substantially, and the department is going to have to reteach in future classes for those who get their lifetime permit that you can now kill people over property, and I don’t think that is right.”

Even some Republicans expressed their concerns. Rep. Greg Martin (R-Hixson) told lawmakers on the House floor he was worried the bill could justify someone shooting an older person with dementia who unknowingly was in the wrong place just because the person believed they were going to act nefariously.

“The Good Book says that it’s an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth, and what that really is given to humanity for is to restrain us from going after someone in a greater way than they have harmed us,” Martin said. “My concern is, Rep. Capley, what I’m hearing you say is that if someone is stealing from you — not harming you in the sense that they’re going to kill you — but if they’re stealing from you or your property or maybe they’re in the wrong place at the wrong time, then you could do something more than an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth.”

However, Capley defended his legislation and argued someone shouldn’t have to stand idly by while a criminal steals their life’s work.

Keep reading

Liberals reject strengthening self-defence laws in Canada

On Monday’s Rebel Roundup livestream, David Menzies and Alexa Lavoie said the Liberals were, yet again, on the wrong side of an important issue.

“I love what Pierre Poilievre had to say after a few high-profile home invasions,” David said, recalling the Conservative leader’s pledge to “fix” self-defence laws by removing the caveat regarding “excessive force or unnecessary force, which nobody can define.”

Referring to an incident from Lindsay, Ont. where a man defended himself from an intruder armed with a crossbow, David said Canada’s current legal framework is “insane.”

Granting homeowners the right to use lethal force during a break in is “the right call,” he added.

“What are you talking about,” Alexa said in response to MP Sahota’s comments.

If someone, especially an armed criminal, enters into an individual’s private dwelling, then that person “should have the right to reply and defend myself and the people who live under my roof,” she said.

The justice system put in place by the Liberals is also releasing more dangerous offenders back onto the streets, putting ordinary citizens in at risk, Alexa continued.

“They should have the right to defend themselves,” she said, slamming politicians like Sahota for not “living in our reality.”

Keep reading

Arizona AG suggests state’s self-defense laws allow residents to shoot masked ICE agents

Arizona Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes said during an interview that residents could fire upon ICE agents who are masked if they feel they are in danger due to the state’s laws on self-defense.

Mayes explained that Arizona has a “Stand Your Ground” law that allows people to use lethal force if they believe their life is in danger.

“It’s kind of a recipe for disaster because you have these masked federal officers with very little identification, sometimes no identification, wearing plain clothes and masks,” Mayes said during an interview with 12News.

She said that the “Stand Your Ground” law in Arizona allows residents to use lethal force if they feel like their life is in jeopardy.

“And we have a Stand Your Ground law that says that if you reasonably believe that your life is in danger and you’re in your house or your car or on your property, that you can defend yourself with lethal force,” Mayes said.

Keep reading

Hero British Bus Driver Fired For Stopping Thief And Protecting Passenger

In a nation where self-defense is apparently a fireable offense, Mark Hehir, a dedicated London bus driver, has been hailed as a hero by the public but sacked by his employer for daring to chase down a thief who snatched a passenger’s necklace.

This absurdity highlights how the UK’s bureaucratic overlords prioritize corporate protocols over actual justice, leaving ordinary citizens vulnerable to rampant crime while the establishment looks the other way.

Hehir’s act of bravery, which even the police deemed “proportionate and necessary,” has sparked petitions, fundraisers, and widespread fury online. But in today’s Britain, where globalist policies have eroded basic freedoms, punishing the good guys seems to be the new normal—echoing a broader decline that sees literal convicted terrorists eyeing political power while heroes like Hehir get the boot.

Keep reading

Far-Left DA Mary Moriarty Threatens to Prosecute ICE Agent Who Fired in Self-Defense Against Violent Agitator

The far-left Hennepin County Attorney’s Office is now claiming it has the “authority” to bring criminal charges against a federal ICE agent who was forced to use his weapon in self-defense on Wednesday.

The incident occurred during a targeted enforcement operation in South Minneapolis as part of a broader Trump administration crackdown on illegal immigration.

According to the Department of Homeland Security, 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good was acting as a “violent rioter” when she allegedly weaponized her SUV, attempting to ram and kill federal officers.

The agent, already doxxed by the legacy media, was identified as a 10-year veteran who discharged his weapon after Good allegedly accelerated her vehicle toward him.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem praised the officer’s split-second decision-making, stating he “used his training to save his own life and that of his colleagues.”

Ross is no stranger to the dangers of the Twin Cities; records show he was seriously injured last year after being dragged by a fleeing vehicle during a similar operation.

VP JD Vance mentioned that the officer involved had been “dragged by a car six months ago” and required 33 stitches in his legs, a fact conveniently omitted by the fake news media.

Despite the federal nature of the incident, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, a prosecutor notorious for her “soft-on-crime” approach, is vowing to use “every available lever to ensure a local, transparent investigation takes place.”

“We have jurisdiction to bring charges, as do the feds,” Daniel Borgertpoepping, a spokesperson for the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office told ABC News.

“It’s a little bit of a complicated interplay but the bottom line is yes, we have jurisdiction to bring criminal charges.”

In an interview with MS NOW, Minnesota’s far-left Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan doubled down on the rhetoric.

While federal officials maintain that ICE agents were performing their lawful duties to remove illegal aliens and maintain public safety, Flanagan and other state Democrats are framing the presence of federal law enforcement as “unconstitutional.”

Flanagan framed federal agents as the primary source of danger in Minnesota.

“These ICE agents, right, who are here under the guise somehow of safety have done nothing but make us less safe,” Flanagan claimed.

She went on to accuse the agents of “detaining American citizens,” “throwing people into the backs of vans,” arresting legal observers and innocent bystanders,” and even “deploying chemical agents around children.”

The Lieutenant Governor repeatedly called for a “full and fair, transparent investigation,” stating that “Renee Goode deserves justice.”

However, she expressed deep frustration that the FBI has rescinded its cooperation with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA).

Keep reading

Bondi Beach Shows Why Self-Defense Is a Vital Right

At Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia, a father-son team of ISIS-inspired terrorists murdered attendees at a celebration of the first day of Hanukkah. One of the attackers was disarmed by a heroic civilian who was shot in the process, while others lost their lives trying to help.

Contrasting Responses to Threats

Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese responded to the shooting with promises to further tighten gun laws in the already restrictive country—a measure more likely to disarm potential victims than to inconvenience those planning a homicidal attack. In the U.S., by contrast, Jews stepped up security by themselves and alongside police. At the request of my wife’s rabbi, I recruited a friend who served as a Force Recon Marine. We strapped on armor and pistols to patrol the crowd at the menorah lighting in Sedona, Arizona. Members of the congregation carried concealed weapons of their own.

Nothing happened, but we were there to deter problems and respond if necessary. There’s a big difference between doubling down on failed state policies and taking responsibility for your own safety.

According to Prime Minister Albanese’s office, after the attack, “leaders agreed that strong, decisive and focused action was needed on gun law reform as an immediate action” and promised “to strengthen gun laws” with further restrictions. Of course, that’s what Australia did in 1996 after the Port Arthur mass shooting. The government banned a variety of firearms, with compensation for their surrender. Compliance was limited and the effort spawned a significant black market for guns.

But Australia’s millions of guns didn’t kill 15 people at Bondi Beach. Two men with known Islamist ties who traveled last month to the Philippines for training at terrorist summer camp committed the murders. They chose guns as their tools, but they could just as easily have used explosives, vehicles, incendiaries, or something else to cause mayhem.

“The issue is not gun laws. It’s hatred of Jews,” Rabbi Daniel Greyber of Durham, North Carolina commented after the Bondi Beach attack.

Keep reading