Latin Rascal E-Book

Pierpaolo Giunta

• Herausgeber: Youcanprint
• Kategorie: Gesellschafts- und Liebesromane
• Sprache: Englisch

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025

Beschreibung

Translated via the internet, with some errors. This is a series of collections of writings. I must say that I know I don't know. Even the grammar and syntax leave much to be desired, and therefore everything must be verified by professionals. For this reason I have hung up my toga. Initially, these writings spoke of innovative ideas, with legal, economic, accounting, philosophical, and other contents. Then reality slammed the door in my face and so I filed a complaint with the Prosecutor's Office. I realized that the truth does not please, disappoints and saddens. So I told some fictional stories. I hope that these stories will better introduce the legal and economic texts I have written and published in this series of booklets. In this novel I publish some episodes on the elections of the next President of the Republic, on the nullity of the repealed crime of abuse of office, on the right to health and on the new hypothesis of "crime of agamy", on the skills needed to fill the role of Minister of Health, and I continue the story of the incredible story of Commissioner Joe Polpetta. All Rights Reserved. 28.02.2025.

Leseprobe

Preface

This is a series of collections of writings.

I must say that I know I don't know. Even the grammar and syntax leave much to be desired, and therefore everything must be verified by professionals. For this reason I have hung up my toga.

Initially, these writings spoke of innovative ideas, with legal, economic, accounting, philosophical, and other contents.

Then reality slammed the door in my face and so I filed a complaint with the Prosecutor's Office.

I realized that the truth does not please, disappoints and saddens.

So I told some fictional stories.

I hope that these stories will better introduce the legal and economic texts I have written and published in this series of booklets.

In this novel I publish some episodes on the elections of the next President of the Republic, on the nullity of the repealed crime of abuse of office, on the right to health and on the new hypothesis of "crime of agamy", on the skills needed to fill the role of Minister of Health, and I continue the story of the incredible story of Commissioner Joe Polpetta.

All Rights Reserved.

28.02.2025.

General index

The obscenity of beauty      5

The reaction to the aggression      8

The Policy of Duties      19

Abuse of office      21

What do you think about me?      29

Separation of functions      33

From Monarchy to Republic      38

Biological donor and contraceptives      40

The World Without God      45

Sing and it will pass.      46

National Security      47

The crime of agamy      50

Transgender Life      57

The rights violated      60

The third term      62

The subversion of school      67

Tax reform      69

Free, but at what price?      70

Ramy Case      71

Discrimination      75

PET THERAPY      81

Article 38 of the Constitution      85

The obscenity of beauty

I remember when Commissioner Joe Polpetta wanted to intervene during a hearing in defense of a sick and elderly gentleman accused of having left his house wearing only a dressing gown and with his private parts in the air.

The PM wanted to convict this gentleman for obscene acts in a public place.

But the Commissioner instead wanted to reduce the fact to a tolerable event, of minor importance, unwanted also due to the inability to understand and want that action.

And therefore, to defeat the prosecution's thesis of offence to public decency, the Commissioner supported the thesis that the feeling of decency changes from person to person, in time and space, and is therefore subjective and not objective.

For example, there are some who go to nudist beaches and do not feel at all guilty.

Furthermore, the Commissioner supported the thesis that the PM was also an ugly woman and offended the general canon of beauty of the other female magistrates in the Court, and that this also offended the lawyers present.

“Why don’t you wear burqas or niqabs to cover your faces?” said the Commissioner.

If God did not make you as beautiful as the sun or the stars, why do they have to suffer Commissioner JP.

The female judge did not like this comparison very much and ordered, perhaps out of female solidarity, two prison police officers present in the courtroom with a prisoner, to calm the Commissioner down from that brazen sexist thesis.

It is not clear what happened, but that unwanted physical contact ended with the prison police officer half strangled, while the other officer who had had the bad idea of drawing his gun and pointing it at the Commissioner, found himself with a loaded gun stuck in his mouth, while the prisoner in handcuffs watched in shock at that scene.

The Judge then ordered everyone to leave the courtroom.

The discussion continued outside the courtroom where the Commissioner was surrounded by four Penitentiary Police officers with truncheons who came to the aid of their two colleagues.

The Commissioner warned that if they used the truncheon he would use his fists, and after taking off his jacket and loosening his tie, like in a Terence Hill and Bud Spencer western, he found himself surrounded by these four officers.

The Commissioner started doing all those moves you see in these movies, pacing back and forth and making noises with his mouth.

At one point he jumped and turned on his back and jumped again and turned back in the original direction in time to see the officer trying to jump on him and hit him with his truncheon, after dodging the blow the commissioner punched him in the chin making him fall to the ground.

Again the Commissioner turned towards the three agents who were trying to approach even though they were scared, starting to glare at them and growl at them. The agents, afraid of being bitten and catching some disease, stopped and tried to put on their gloves.

At that scene the prosecutor intervened and shouted to stop, and said that we were just children and that we were behaving in a childish way.

It ended like this, and before leaving Commissioner JP helped the officer to his feet.

They went home with the promise that the Commissioner would teach them a few moves to immobilize a person without using a truncheon or a gun.

Legend has it that the next day there was a van with 10 prison police officers in riot gear armed with tezers, pepper spray, buckshot guns, ropes, a fire extinguisher, truncheons, reinforced gloves, knuckle dusters, as well as pistols and machine guns, ready to leave for the Commissioner's house.

They even called the dog catcher.

But the PM never signed the arrest warrant.

But this is just a legend.

The reaction to the aggression

Always on the right of self-defense as a survival instinct against the oppressor, when the State is corrupt.

In fact, in America, in the USA, weapons are freely used and carried as there is a broad concept in which defense is always legitimate when one is attacked, or rather threatened.

Any threat to one's own safety or that of the State is a reason for reaction and legitimate defense.

And therefore the aggression that occurs inside the home at night in a situation of diminished defense, is the same as the aggression suffered in the middle of the street or in a commercial activity during the day, and therefore the law does not find a limit in the American legal system compared to the European or Italian legal systems.

This was justified in the 1800s as there was no widespread rule of law and communications were lacking.

Furthermore, the use of weapons was to defend the US state itself from possible attacks by other states.

A historical example was the American Civil War in which the Southern states of America found themselves at war with the Northern states (Northerners versus Southerners).

Today America has changed and even the current president Trump refuses to send men to foreign territories for war and seeks alternative solutions such as trade tariffs or financial sanctions.

The question: "is the Constitutional provision that allows all citizens to use and carry weapons still relevant?"

In America, approximately 20,000 people die from guns every year.

Among these cases we have both the thief killed by the homeowner and the student killed by his classmate at school.

For those who love guns, the solution is to arm children too and guarantee them the right to defend themselves, every citizen is a soldier or a policeman and must arm himself to defend the Motherland.

The free circulation of weapons means that they are available to everyone, including minor children.

Another type of idea, for example the European one, is that of a State where only the Police has the task of defending the citizen from criminals and attacks from outside the State.

According to the American idea, this means that the State is not capable of defending its citizens even if we are in the era of super technology, with millions of cameras scattered everywhere filming the lives of citizens 24 hours a day, all year round.

Unfortunately, American news reports tell of citizens killed too easily by gunfights, often against police forces, because even being stopped for a burned-out brake light can be seen as a threat to one's freedom of movement and therefore a reason to react. This is also the reason why in America we see so many citizens deprived of their freedom and handcuffed for any reason.

For example, the law in Italy for the transfer of the prisoner from the prison to the Court must be carried out without the use of handcuffs, and also during the trial, according to a ruling of the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights). Only when the prisoners to be transported are in greater number, two or more, then the use of handcuffs is allowed during the journey. And if you notice, the windows are darkened to guarantee the privacy and dignity of the prisoner, and not only to avoid creating alarm in the population.

On the contrary, the free circulation of weapons and their lack of lock-up means that weapons are within everyone's reach, even those who have no right to keep or purchase them.

Therefore this availability leads to the conclusion that it is the very existence of the weapon, held in full freedom and without control, that leads a person to use it in an improper and wrong way. And not putting a brake on this freedom, simply by reporting that the right recognized by the Law or Constitution exists, means not wanting to understand or secure the territory.

Unfortunately, people are a set of emotions and ideas subjected to strong pressures every day, and if not properly managed (or treated in the most serious cases), as in nature a trapped animal turns and attacks the snake, also for the human being frightened or angry rebels and attacks the aggressor or bully, (or simply the one who happens to be passing by that place at the wrong time, when it comes to highly stressed or sick people, while others find in committing suicide the freedom from that oppression).

And it is for this reason that the widespread presence of an effective Justice and Health system can largely prevent such situations of reaction towards other people or towards the State.

It is the greater prevention that a Modern State has, compared to repression, to deprive a person of freedom or life.

In this last case, the citizen becomes at the same time: policeman, judge and executioner. And the decision is instinctive and executed in a few seconds, based on repeated patterns.

And so even if violence has no justification, because many would prefer to die rather than kill and live with the remorse of having taken the life of another person, the possibility recognized by the Law of being able to take justice into one's own hands is the recognition and proof of the failure of the Rule of Law.

A state that makes its citizens pay a lot of taxes, leaving them alone to protect their homes and their families, and a corrupt state made up of incompetents who only protect their jobs.

We recently saw President Trump's son in Italy who goes hunting quietly in a reserve, and reported. It will be all in order, or President Trump will pardon him through President Meloni, but as you can see it is not easy to respect all the rules for an Italian, let alone for a foreigner.