Adding another viewpoint:

I think it is very important to deliberately discuss these clear and present dangers that warrant our concern.

The goal in my view is to return to rule of law. That is explained as a process here:

The Conviction Factory, The Collapse of America's Criminal Courts, by Roger Roots
Page 40
Private Prosecutors
"For decades before and after the Revolution, the adjudication of criminals in America was governed primarily by the rule of private prosecution: (1) victims of serious crimes approached a community grand jury, (2) the grand jury investigated the matter and issued an indictment only if it concluded that a crime should be charged, and (3) the victim himself or his representative (generally an attorney but sometimes a state attorney general) prosecuted the defendant before a petit jury of twelve men. Criminal actions were only a step away from civil actions - the only material difference being that criminal claims ostensibly involved an interest of the public at large as well as the victim. Private prosecutors acted under authority of the people and in the name of the state - but for their own vindication. The very term "prosecutor" meant criminal plaintiff and implied a private person. A government prosecutor was referred to as an attorney general and was a rare phenomenon in criminal cases at the time of the nation's founding. When a private individual prosecuted an action in the name of the state, the attorney general was required to allow the prosecutor to use his name - even if the attorney general himself did not approve of the action.
Private prosecution meant that criminal cases were for the most part limited by the need of crime victims for vindication. Crime victims held the keys to a potential defendant's fate and often negotiated the settlement of criminal cases. After a case was initiated in the name of the people, however, private prosecutors were prohibited from withdrawing the action pursuant to private agreement with the defendant. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."

Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly and with lagging steps, but honestly and bravely and with whatever implements and facilities [were] convenient and at hand. Any person could act in the capacity of a constable without being one, and when summoned by a law enforcement officer, a private person became a temporary member of the police department. The law also presumed that any person acting in his public capacity as an officer was rightfully appointed."

That is what one might expect in a world described by a Bill of Rights.

@Josf-Kelley Hey Josh, the DA’s in most larger cities have been bought and the laws broken in the upper crust government has been ignored. Someone stole the blindfold from Lady Justice. A good, law abiding, 17 yr old kid on a 2 $ million cash bond which was clearly self defense on video!

@Josf-Kelley How do we get rid of the roaches that have contaminated our justice system

@FEWI

"How do we get rid of the roaches that have contaminated our justice system."

I think that the first step is to discover, acknowledge, and employ the uncontroversial pile of evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that the law being forced upon is is counterfeit.

The next step which is warranted by that clear and present danger to everyone is to discover, acknowledge, and employ the actual law process: each independent individual working as a volunteer in their own unique capacity.

Of course there are a few tried and true methods of dealing with criminals who counterfeit government.

The first step is to assemble a valid accusation, which can be in writing, but does not have to be in writing, so long as the accusation is based upon demonstrable fact.

The second step is to take the accusation to one of the local members of the common law grand jury pool. These people are called magistrates or justices of the peace.

The third step is troublesome because the criminals no longer acknowledge the common law, the Bill of Rights in any form, not in a National form, not in a State form, not in a Federal form, no form whatsoever.

That third step brings you up to speed as far as my study goes.

The next step I see is to find like minded people (volunteers who discover, acknowledge, and employ the evidence of clear and present dangers domestic) who then may want to form something in common law called a Committee of Safety or a Committee for Safety.

If that step is accomplished, then the next step - in my opinion - is a act, agreed to by the committee (unanimously) to set to the task of reestablishing independent common law grand juries in your county.

I was at that point in National Liberty Alliance when I was the State Coordinator for that organization in California. I was in that organization for one year. I wrote step by step methods on their forum for that year. I attended meetings, I spoke with those above, and with those below. Out of all those people not one was able to grasp the concepts and principles involved in the common law: Voluntary Association for Mutual Defense, and every single one of them are on a twisted path.

Is that my delusions of grandeur?

Of course that would be the knee jerk reaction.

When the criminals with or without badges kick in the door, they no longer knock, people will then see the significance of getting the account accurate: common law.