₦airaland Forum

Releasing terrorists is a big error, most have gone back to terrorism...and it kills the deterrence factor.

State governors must enforce it urgently.

Fenrir:
BIBLE PASSAGES THAT CONTRADICT EVERYTHING YOU’RE SAYING
1. Christianity rejects enforced religion — free will is central

You keep talking about “Christian laws” and forcing society to follow Christian doctrine.

But the Bible is crystal clear that faith cannot be forced:

Joshua 24:15

“Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve…”

Christianity requires choice, not legislation.

Revelation 3:20

“I stand at the door and knock. If anyone opens the door, I will come in…”

Christ does not break in or impose himself.
Free will is the foundation of Christianity.

2. Christians are specifically told NOT to impose religious law on society

You think “Christian laws” should govern the region. The Bible directly rejects this.

John 18:36

“My kingdom is not of this world…”

Jesus rejected political power or the creation of religious states.

Romans 12:18

“As far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.”

That’s the opposite of “impose our laws on society.”

2 Corinthians 3:17

“Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.”

Not religious rule.
Not enforced doctrine.
Not domination.

3. Jesus never preached domination, force, or political control

You claim Jesus was “an activist” calling for aggression. Total distortion.

Matthew 26:52

“Put away your sword. Those who live by the sword will die by the sword.”

Jesus literally shut down violent “defence measures.”

Matthew 5:44

“Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”

That is not “fight back or go extinct.”

Matthew 5:9

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.”

Not the agitators.
Not the lawmakers.
Not the political crusaders.

4. Tribalism and ethnic supremacy are anti-Christian

You mix tribal identity with religion — which Jesus condemned outright.

Colossians 3:11

“Here there is no Greek or Jew… but Christ is all, and in all.”

Christianity dissolves tribal boundaries.
Not strengthens them.

Galatians 3:28

“There is neither Jew nor Greek… for you are all one in Christ.”

Jesus didn’t build tribal laws.
He tore them down.

5. “Christian laws” = the exact thing Jesus rejected

You are literally recreating the same religious legalism Jesus fought against.

Matthew 23:4

“They tie up heavy, burdensome laws and put them on people’s shoulders…”

This is what Jesus condemned the Pharisees for — exactly what you want to recreate.

Romans 6:14

“You are not under law, but under grace.”

Christianity does not operate by legal code or theocracy.

6. Christianity condemns religious control and coercion

You want to “outlaw ideologies,” regulate beliefs, and police thought.

Christian scripture says the opposite:

Romans 14:12

“Each of us will give an account of himself to God.”

Not to a government.
Not to a religious authority.
Not to “Christian laws.”

Romans 14:5

“Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.”

That is freedom of conscience — not coerced belief.

7. Jesus rejected the entire idea of Christian government

He wanted spiritual transformation, not political dominion.

Matthew 22:21

“Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”

He separated government and religion 2,000 years before modern secularism.

Conclusion

According to the Bible:

You cannot force Christianity by law.

You cannot enforce Christian doctrine on society.

You cannot mix tribal politics with the Gospel.

You cannot impose belief, behaviour, or ideology.

You cannot dominate others in the name of Christ.

You cannot establish a Christian theocracy.

You cannot remove free will — Christianity depends on it.

Everything you are arguing for is explicitly and repeatedly rejected by Jesus and the New Testament.

If you actually followed the Bible instead of your emotions, you’d realise your entire argument is the exact behaviour Jesus condemned.

ALL "Christian Nigerians" do this in some form! Disrespect their own religion by twisting it to suit them the same as "most" Nigerians do with the law.

No enforcement, read well...for Christians, in their sphere of interest.

Fenrir:
Fella, you need to hear this plainly:
What you’re saying is dangerous.
Not bold.
Not “Christian activism.”
Not leadership.
Dangerous.
People who talk the way you’re talking — with emotion instead of strategy, fantasy instead of training — are the ones who get innocent women and children killed, because they push governments into reckless decisions based on ego instead of reality.
You’re treating terrorism like it’s some moral movie battle where “Christian laws” or shouting tough slogans magically solve anything. That is not how the real world works. That is not how conflict zones work. And that is absolutely not how you defeat extremist networks.
You want to know what actually works?
Training. Discipline. Intelligence work. Strategy. Coordination. Professional forces who understand insurgency, counter‑terrorism, and stabilisation operations.
People like me — Norwegian, ex–British Royal Marines — who spent over a decade dealing with exactly the kind of threats you’re talking about. We learned the hard way what happens when untrained, emotional civilians try to “fix terrorism” with ideology instead of expertise:
chaos, escalation, retaliation, and dead civilians.
Your ideas aren’t solutions — they’re fuel.
Your rhetoric isn’t protection — it’s provocation.
Your calls for “Christian laws” aren’t defence — they’re just a softer version of the extremist systems you claim to oppose.
This isn’t a movie.
This isn’t an online fantasy.
This isn’t about looking powerful in a forum thread.
If you genuinely care about Nigeria’s safety, stop pushing ideas that make the problem worse. Stop framing war like a cultural debate. And stop pretending ideology replaces training.
Because when people with no experience start talking like battlefield commanders, real families pay the price.
If you want to help, start by not contributing to the harm.

It is a defensive measure, this beautiful ideology must be preserved because of it's benefits, because the alternative is dark.

Fenrir:
You keep telling people to “stop trolling,” but you still haven’t realised you’re describing your own behaviour with every reply you make. You say “people can be whatever they want,” yet two posts ago you were calling for Christian laws to shape society. That’s the exact opposite of people being whatever they want. You say you’re “fighting for equality and freedom,” yet you want a legal system built around your religion. That is not equality. That is not freedom. That is forced ideology — just with a cross on it instead of a crescent.
And here’s the part you keep dodging because you know it collapses your entire argument:
A “Christian law system” is just Sharia by another name.
Same structure.
Same purpose.
Same enforcement of religious doctrine as civil law.
Same removal of free choice.
The only difference is which holy book you prefer.
You complain about extremism and indoctrination, but you’re advocating the same framework — only for your side. That’s not fighting extremism. That’s replacing it with your own version and pretending it’s morally superior.
And that’s the whole problem:
Everything you say contradicts everything else you say.
You talk about freedom while pushing control.
You talk about equality while promoting a religious hierarchy.
You talk about protecting society while trying to impose one group’s beliefs on everyone else.
You don’t see the contradictions because you jump from one emotional argument to another without connecting them. That’s why every reply you make shifts the goalposts. And that’s why your arguments collapse the moment they’re held to the same standard you apply to everyone else.
If you genuinely want freedom and equality, then you can’t advocate for religious law — Christian, Muslim, or anything else.
If you want religious law, then stop pretending you support freedom.
You can’t mix the two.
You can’t have both.
Right now, you’re trying to sell Sharia-lite while calling it “Christian progress.”
And that’s exactly why nothing you’re saying adds up.

Christian laws, as a defence measure, clearly stated in my article, refer to the article, this time read dispassionately.

Fenrir:
You didn’t respond to anything I actually said — not one point. Instead, you jumped straight into some scattered rant about Americans and Nicki Minaj, which has nothing to do with anything I wrote. That alone shows you’re reacting emotionally, not thinking logically.
Let me make this clear for you:
I’m Norwegian, not American. My people don’t care about Nicki Minaj, don’t follow her drama, and we don’t shape our opinions around celebrities. Bringing her into this conversation just shows you’re trying to avoid addressing the contradictions in your own argument.
You’re arguing like someone who didn’t understand the assignment and now wants to change the subject to hide it. This is the behaviour of someone who skimmed half the information, got overwhelmed, and now lashes out because he can’t defend his own position.
Instead of addressing the very clear contradictions I pointed out — tribalism vs Christianity, free will vs forced laws, “foreign ideology” vs your own religion being foreign — you ran off into irrelevant comparisons and imaginary accusations. That’s what happens when someone debates from emotion instead of understanding.
You keep throwing around the word “hypocritical,” yet you can’t actually explain your own worldview without contradicting it in the same breath. You say foreign ideology is dangerous, yet your entire religion came from outside your tribe. You say you fight for Christian values, yet you ignore the core Christian principles when they don’t fit your cultural preferences. You say you defend freedom, yet you want to legislate belief.
This is not conviction.
This is not insight.
This is not strength.
This is confusion wrapped in noise.
If you want to be taken seriously in discussions about ideology, religion, morality, or national structure, you need to actually understand what you’re talking about. Right now, you’re proving exactly why I said you need to go back and actually study the subjects you’re trying to lecture people on.
Because the way you responded wasn’t a rebuttal — it was the intellectual equivalent of a child getting frustrated with a homework question he didn’t understand.
When you’re ready to address the points directly instead of running off into irrelevant tangents about countries and celebrities that have nothing to do with me or the argument, then we can talk. Until then, you’re only proving my original point.

Refer to my main subject for more emphasis, contribute meaningfully or move on. Nobody cares if you are from Norway or whatever

Gumi you have never said government should rehabilitate orphans whose parents were killed in bokoharam and it's bandits affiliates attacks, why can't you speak for the innocent victims, but choose to advocate for terrorists?

Fenrir:
Fella, let’s cut the nonsense. You wrote on your profile: “Protect your tribal lands and homelands, do not be deceived by foreign ideology”, but do you even realize how much of what you benefit from daily comes straight from Europeans? If you really rejected foreign ideology, you wouldn’t be living like you do right now. Let me spell it out:

1. Legal & Human Rights Protections

Courts, criminal codes, civil laws—entirely British common law.

Free speech, property rights, gender equality—European liberal ideas.

International human rights treaties (UDHR, ICCPR) protecting you? European.

2. Political System & Governance

Federalism, separation of powers, elections, bureaucracy—all European.

Every vote you cast, every regulation you follow, every government office—colonial inheritance.

3. Economy & Banking

Banks, Central Bank, stock exchange, contracts, trade law—European systems.

Loans, salaries, businesses, even ATMs—you can’t use any without foreign frameworks.

4. Infrastructure & Technology

Roads, railways, airports, ports, electricity, water supply, telecom—European designs.

5. Education

Schools, curricula, universities, degrees, certifications—European templates.

Your literacy, professional skills, science knowledge—all from European influence.

6. Healthcare & Medical Advancements

Hospitals, clinics, medical licensing—introduced by Europeans.

Modern medicine: vaccines, antibiotics, anesthesia, sanitation, disease control (malaria treatment, immunizations), emergency care—European science.

Every basic health service you rely on daily is foreign in origin.

7. Everyday Benefits & Society

Police, judiciary, postal system, trade law, property rights, electricity, running water, transport, banking—foreign imports.

That phone or device you’re using to type this lecture? Completely foreign-invented. Without European or Western technology, it wouldn’t exist.

Bottom line: If you really rejected foreign ideology, you’d be living in a mud hut with zero schools, hospitals, electricity, roads, banks, courts, or phones. Yet here you are, enjoying all of it while lecturing others about “foreign deception.” That’s hypocrisy in its rawest form. Stop pretending you can cherry-pick what’s “tribal” while taking everything Europe built for modern life.

Wake up, fella.

Stop trolling... people can be whatever they want, it's irrelevant to me. We are fighting for equality and freedom. Yes protect it from the bandits and terrorists.

Fenrir:
Fella, you’re focusing on the wrong thing. SWAT-style equipment isn’t the solution. I’m ex‑military, and I can tell you from experience: it’s not about the gear, it’s about the hands the gear is in.

What Nigeria really needs to effectively counter terrorism is not more toys, but a stronger system:

1. Less corruption
If officers are underpaid, bribed, or selling intel, no amount of armored vehicles will fix anything. Corruption rots a unit from the inside out.

2. More integrity and discipline
Units must operate with professionalism and loyalty to the mission, not to tribal interests, politicians, or personal gain.

3. Proper enforcement and accountability
When officers commit abuses, desert posts, or fail in their duties, there must be consequences. You cannot fight terrorism with a force that doesn’t police itself.

4. Better training
Special units are only as good as their training. Nigeria needs real counter‑terrorism training, not ceremonial drills. CQB, intelligence handling, population engagement, IED awareness, ambush response—all of it.

5. Overwatch, intelligence and coordination
You can’t win against terrorists without solid intel, surveillance, and coordination between police, military, and local communities.

6. Logistics and support
Special units need reliable transport, communication, supply chains, and medevac. Equipment is useless if it can’t even be maintained or supported.

7. Proper leadership
A well-led, disciplined squad will outperform a badly led unit with the best gear in the world.

Nigeria doesn’t need “American SWAT” cosplay. What it needs is a police system that is honest, trained, disciplined, supported, and accountable. Without that foundation, you could hand out tanks and it still wouldn’t matter.

Stop pretending real life works like a Hollywood action flick.

Stop trolling

Fenrir:
Fella, you keep preaching about Christianity, freedom, and “Christian values,” but you don’t seem to understand the very religion you claim to defend. Your worldview contradicts the core of your own faith at every turn.

You say Christians must “wake up,” “fight back,” and create “Christian laws,” yet you were the same person who wrote: “Protect your tribal lands and homelands, do not be deceived by foreign ideology.”
Here’s the problem: Christianity is a foreign ideology to your tribe. It isn’t native to your village, your customs, your ancestors, or your culture. If foreign influence is so evil, then by your own logic, you should drop Christianity entirely. But you won’t, because you switch principles depending on what suits you in the moment. That’s not conviction — that’s confusion.

Let’s be clear:
A Christian who puts tribe before Christ is not following Christianity.
A Christian who wants to force laws on others is ignoring free will — the foundation of the faith.
A Christian who preaches fear, control, and domination is following politics, not the Gospel.

Christ never told anyone to impose religion on a region. Christ never demanded tribal laws or ethnic superiority. Christ never taught that spiritual truth comes from cultural dominance. Christ stood against corruption, hypocrisy, ego-driven leaders, and people who twisted faith to serve their agendas — exactly what you’re doing now.

Your entire argument boils down to this:
You’re placing man-made traditions, tribal identity, and cultural ego above the two things Christianity demands that you respect most — free will and freedom of conscience. You’re trying to force the faith on others while preaching about “Christian freedom.” That’s not passion. That’s not leadership. That’s not righteousness.
That’s contradiction dressed up as ideology.

If you truly believed in Christian principles, you would defend people’s right to choose, think, speak, and worship freely — not try to legislate them into compliance. You would fight corruption, not replace it with religious control. You would encourage moral example, not political dominance.

Before you declare yourself a defender of Christianity, try understanding the faith first. Right now, all you’re defending is your personal bias wrapped in scripture.

Christianity doesn’t need crusaders for control.
It needs people who actually live the values they claim to protect.

And honestly — how is it that an atheist can see this more clearly than Nigerian Christians?

You hypocrite!

This is the same things you people say to Nicki Minaj, you don't even need to be called a Christian to fight for genocide victims. You are twisted. Most Americans fighting against genocide in Nigeria are not Christians, they are fighting for human beings. This is the problem with you hypocritical folks, you think everyone should be selfish minded as you. What has my being a tagged a Christian have to do with speaking out for the weak?

Check yourself very well.

State governors should ensure enforcement immediately, empower your state approved vigilantes.

Outlaw roaming around or living in the forests, due to kidnapping and banditry, and proscribe 15 years imprisonment for people caught living in the forest. We must use laws to protect ourselves. State and federal parliamentarians must play their roles in ensuring national security, by passing laws that will help protect Nigerians.

Fenrir:
Because I live in Nigeria, my daughter is half yoruba from my first marriage and she died of cancer now im married to an igbo woman

And before you ask, no traditions either time and thats the law

Federal law = mandatory for everyone
State law = mandatory unless it conflicts with federal law

But customary law = irrelevant unless the COUPLE CHOOSE IT and what the family thinks doesn't matter the law is freedom to marry and freedom does not come with conditions from family however irrelevant does not = unimportant it just means its a choice of the couple not anyone else.


Your marriage and wedding laws that none of you know or care about.

The laws of marriage and weddings in Nigeria THE TRUTH

⚖️ LEGAL RIGHT TO MARRY FREELY IN NIGERIA
(Applies equally to Nigerians and Foreigners)
1️⃣ The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999, as amended)
Section 34(1): Dignity of Human Person

“Every individual is entitled to respect for the dignity of his person…”

Explanation:
No one may be forced into marriage or compelled to perform any traditional, cultural, or religious rite. Forcing a person to comply with customs (like bride price or family approval) violates dignity and autonomy.

Section 35(1): Right to Personal Liberty

“Every person shall be entitled to his personal liberty…”

Explanation:
Marriage is a matter of free personal choice. Neither families nor communities have lawful power to impose cultural or religious obligations on adults who freely consent to marry.

Section 37: Right to Private and Family Life

“The privacy of citizens, their homes… is hereby guaranteed and protected.”

Explanation:
Marriage decisions are private matters. Family or cultural intrusion in the couple’s private marital decisions is unconstitutional.

Section 38(1): Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion

“Every person shall be entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion…”

Explanation:
A couple may freely decide to marry under religion, custom, the statutory (civil) system, or a combination — or to reject all religious and traditional rites entirely.

Section 42(1): Freedom from Discrimination

“A citizen of Nigeria… shall not… be subjected to any form of discrimination…”

Explanation:
Families, communities, or institutions cannot impose traditions or rites based on tribe, gender, or religion as a condition for marriage. The same protection extends to foreign spouses through the equality and human-rights provisions.

2️⃣ The Marriage Act (Cap M6 LFN 2004)
Section 7 — Notice of Marriage

“Whenever any persons desire to marry, one of the parties shall sign and give to the registrar…”

Explanation:
Marriage under the Act begins solely by the couple’s own decision. The Act does not require family consent, traditional introductions, or any cultural rite.

Section 11(1) — Conditions for Certificate

“The registrar shall issue his certificate… upon being satisfied that each party is of full age and has freely consented…”

Explanation:
The only required consent is the couple’s. Once both are of full age, no family or traditional approval is legally necessary.

Section 34 — Legal Validity of Marriage

“All marriages celebrated under this Act shall be good and valid in law to all intents and purposes.”

Explanation:
Once the statutory process is completed, the marriage is fully valid nationwide — even if no traditional rites were done.

Section 41 — Preventing Marriage Under False Pretence

“Whoever endeavours to prevent a marriage by pretence that his consent is required by law… shall be guilty of an offence.”

Explanation:
Families or community members who try to stop a lawful marriage by claiming their consent or cultural approval is required are breaking the law.

3️⃣ Customary Law and Its Limitations
Recognition under Section 35 of the Marriage Act

“Nothing in this Act shall affect the validity of any marriage contracted under or in accordance with any customary law…”

Explanation:
Customary marriages are valid only if voluntarily entered into and consistent with the Constitution. Coercive or discriminatory customs are void.

Evidence Act 2011, Section 18(3) — Repugnancy Clause

“In any judicial proceeding where a custom is relied upon, it shall not be enforced if it is repugnant to natural justice, equity, and good conscience, or incompatible… with any law for the time being in force.”

Explanation:
No custom that violates equality, liberty, or dignity can be enforced — including customs that force bride price, introductions, or family control.

🔹 3B. Bride Price, Introduction, and Family Consent — Not Legally Required
(a) Statutory Freedom to Marry Without Tradition

The Marriage Act governs statutory (civil and church) marriages. It makes no reference to bride price, introduction, or family approval.

Under Section 34, once the statutory procedure is followed, the marriage is “good and valid in law.”

Therefore, even if no bride price is paid, no family introduction held, or the families disapprove, the marriage remains fully legal.

(b) Constitutional and Human-Rights Protection

Sections 34, 35, and 38 of the Constitution guarantee dignity, liberty, and freedom of conscience.

Forcing or coercing a couple to perform cultural rites, or to pay a bride price, violates these rights.

The African Charter (Cap A9 LFN 2004), enforceable in Nigeria, also prohibits discrimination based on national origin or culture in matters of marriage (Articles 2, 6, and 18(3)).

(c) Customary Law and the Repugnancy Test

Courts recognise that bride price and “handing-over” are typical proof elements in customary marriages (e.g., Obi v. Bosah (2019)), but only when the couple choose customary marriage.

When a couple marry under the Marriage Act, none of those customary elements are required.

Even within customary law, any rule that forces a bride price or family approval can be struck down under Section 18(3) of the Evidence Act as “repugnant to natural justice.”

(d) Judicial Confirmation of Freedom and Consent

Osamwonyi v. Osamwonyi (1972) – Consent is the foundation of all marriages.

Agbeja v. Agbeja (1985) – Customary marriage must be voluntary.

Mojekwu v. Mojekwu (1997) – Discriminatory or oppressive customs are void.

Obi v. Bosah (2019) – Bride price and handing-over define a customary marriage, not a legal or mandatory one.

(e) Legal Result

Bride price, introduction, or family consent are purely cultural — never legal — requirements.
Couples may lawfully reject them and marry under the Marriage Act or any other voluntary system.
Any person who attempts to compel them commits an offence under Section 41 of the Marriage Act and violates the Constitution.

(f) Even in Traditional Marriages, Specific Rituals Like Prostration or Kneeling Can Be Rejected

Relevant Laws and Principles:

Constitution Section 34(1) — Dignity of the Human Person

Any act that humiliates or degrades either spouse (e.g., forced prostration, kneeling, or other imposed gestures) violates this constitutional right.

Courts recognise that dignity and personal autonomy cannot be surrendered to culture.

Evidence Act Section 18(3) — Repugnancy Clause

Customs that compel a person to perform physical acts of submission or humiliation are repugnant to natural justice, equity, and good conscience and therefore unenforceable.

Even where a couple opt for a customary wedding, they may lawfully omit any ritual they find offensive or inconsistent with their beliefs.

Constitution Section 38(1) — Freedom of Conscience and Religion

A couple may object on conscience or religious grounds to any ritual gesture. Their decision is legally protected, and no family can lawfully insist otherwise.

Case Law Support

Mojekwu v. Mojekwu (1997) – Any custom that degrades or discriminates is unconstitutional.

Meribe v. Egwu (1976) – Consent, not ritual formality, determines validity.

Agbeja v. Agbeja (1985) – Customary marriages stand only where all acts are voluntary.

Practical Effect:

Even in a voluntary traditional marriage, no family, elder, or community leader has the legal power to compel a bride or groom to prostrate, kneel, bow, or perform any symbolic act against their will.
Refusal to perform such a gesture does not invalidate the marriage under any Nigerian law.
The essence of both statutory and customary marriage is mutual consent, not ritual form.

4️⃣ International Human Rights and Equality for All Persons
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Cap A9 LFN 2004)

Article 2: Equal rights without distinction of race, national origin, or religion.

Article 6: Right to liberty and security of the person.

Article 18(3): State must eliminate discrimination and protect family rights.

Explanation:
Marriage freedom and equality extend to all persons within Nigeria, including foreigners. No one can be treated differently because of nationality or ethnicity.

5️⃣ Judicial Principles Supporting Freedom to Marry
Case Legal Rule Meaning
Osamwonyi v. Osamwonyi (1972) Consent is fundamental Marriage without free consent is void
Agbeja v. Agbeja (1985) Customary marriage must be voluntary No coercion or forced customs allowed
Mojekwu v. Mojekwu (1997) Discriminatory customs invalid Oppressive customs have no force
Obi v. Bosah (2019) Bride price/handing-over define customary marriage only Optional and cultural, not universal requirement
6️⃣ Summary — What the Law Means in Practice
Legal Source Applies To Legal Effect
Constitution (ss.34–38, 42) All persons Freedom, dignity, equality; no coercion or discrimination
Marriage Act (ss.7–41) All persons Marriage valid solely on couple’s consent; no tradition required
Evidence Act (s.18(3)) All customs Voids coercive or discriminatory traditions
African Charter (Cap A9) All persons in Nigeria Protects equality and freedom to marry
Case law All marriages Upholds consent; voids forced or oppressive customs
✅ FINAL LEGAL CONCLUSION

Under Nigerian law —
for all persons, whether both Nigerians or one foreign and one Nigerian:

Marriage is purely voluntary — only the couple’s consent matters.

The couple may freely choose the form (statutory, religious, customary, or combination).

Bride price, family introduction, and traditional rites are optional, not compulsory.

Even where a traditional ceremony is chosen, any specific ritual (such as prostration, kneeling, or symbolic acts) may be lawfully refused without invalidating the marriage.

No one (family, culture, or religion) may impose extra conditions or coercion.

Any attempt to force compliance with cultural or religious rites violates the Constitution (ss. 34–38), the Marriage Act (ss. 7–41), and the Evidence Act (s. 18(3)).

All couples — Nigerian or mixed nationality — share equal protection under law and international human-rights treaties.

Oh boy

Fenrir:
Im not black at all,
Im Norwegian/Swedish/Danish by blood

And you people here confuse nationality, race and ethnicity

My nationality is Norwegian
My race is white
But my ethnicity is my clan the same way that your ethnicity is your tribe but your nationality is Nigerian and your race is African not black

Okay, just wondering, nairaland is a local site, you seem to have an interest in Nigeria...I totally agree with some of your submissions, but there are still some very reasonable Nigerians, the problem is the political class.

Big men should go for armed private security as it is obtainable in other countries... police is for the public.

Fenrir:
No actually, in my culture back home people can leave the front doors of their home open and go out knowing everything is fine

Norway is in the top 5 countries in the world for law and order, almost zero corruption

Nigeria is 140-180 corruption, crime and rape everywhere especially in the Yoruba communities so do not lecture me about nonsense you know nothing about and the difference im willing to fight for my country and yours but all you do is sit on your backside complaining. Does anything like this actually happen in civilised countries? Or just countries like this where the government only steals from the population?

Are you a black Norwegian?

Fenrir:
Im Norwegian and an ex British Royal Marine dont talk to me about terrorism if your government gave me permission and equipment they would be gone

Stop complaining about one law while you break and abuse the rest

Stick to the topic. People break laws everywhere, it's the duty of the state to enforce laws. Terrorism and kidnapping by jihadists bandits bokoharam and iswap, in cohoot with the fulani militia is the problem of Nigeria. Not about breaking traffic laws etc...

DaGC:
Ancestor wey dey call person Gen-Z, e go pain me if I know say I senior you. So bye 👋🏿

You sounded like you are going for NYSC, the way you speak passionately on it, I finished my NYSC 2 decades ago.

What type of phoolish people do we have in government?

Fenrir:
And citizen to obey the law which almost none of you do. And no not the politicians your government cannot be trusted. Well actually none of you can be trusted.

Stop talking like a kid, people disobey laws everywhere, but it's the strong laws that is the deterrence... enforcement of laws, and strong laws.

We are talking of terrorists here not breaking of laws, we are talking of terrorists killing people, this topic is about state security, arming our vigilante to be able to unalive terrorists.

Or are you a terrorist sympathiser?

They are useless to Nigerians, parasites and jihadists enablers. Tax them and tax the church and mosque as businesses.

Religion is destroying Nigeria

Fenrir:
You can’t shout about “law” and “rights” when it suits you, while forcing culture, forcing tradition, lying, and breaking laws that are meant to protect human rights and basic decency.

You have no right to complain now, because you’ve ignored or denied the very protections that should apply to everyone. Laws don’t disappear when it’s inconvenient for you, and neither do basic human rights. Be consistent before you try to lecture anyone.

What or who are you referring to?

It's the job of senators to make laws and job of police to enforce laws, so if you have nothing sensible to say, move on.

We are talking of jihadists and terrorists killings you are talking of people breaking laws, are you a jihadist?

F

Fenrir:
I’ve lived in your country long enough to see it clearly: Nigeria is a corrupt and criminal place. THE MAJORITY, though not all, break the law daily and openly don’t care — until a crime personally affects them.

Rape, child molestation, theft between citizens — all rampant. Yet if someone challenges tradition, steals your “bride price,” or tries to let people marry as they choose, suddenly it’s the end of the world.

The truth is almost the whole country operates outside the law, ignoring basic human rights and decency, and that’s why people get away with it. Until that reality changes, complaints about “law” are hollow.

It's the job of the political class to ensure laws are adhered to.

All fulani boys, yet some fools allow them to get settlement in their states.

Start state police now. Stop waiting for federal government, empower your hunters, train and employ your forests guards.

benpuzzy:
The only thing preventing the vigilante from winning the war against Banditry is the kind of weapon they use cos these bandits are afraid of vigilantes.

Absolutely, I mean as a people we are foolish if we can't make laws to protect ourselves from terrorists. No nation on earth is this stupid...we are refusing to protect ourselves by ourselves

Nigerian government do not think things through, keep disgracing us. The man committed the crime in the UK, hence he should be punished there. It's a pity this government keep focusing on the wrong things.

ComeToJesus:
Little wonder Zamfara that spearheaded the Sharia movement is the worst hit after Borno

Spot on, we all remembered that very extremists Zamfara leader that year.

Disgraced president

Apt...Kwara is a case study

Mass protests now, shut down the country