Legally, Police Do Not Have to Protect You – Yet, You Go to Jail For Not Assisting Them

Why is copblock regurgitating stories?

many times its not the answer that is the problem but asking the right question… thank you for posting this as it is the question everyone needs to ask. when it is suppose to be the other way around

hay thank for the point out that was vary informing.. i recomend the face book page as well,, there is so much force building up that the corrupt is on the run.. your right we are winning

What truly retarded thinking. This authors opinion….is simply uneducated and frankly, dumb.
A few months ago Ademo posted an article of similar sheer stupidity about this similar topic. His thinking was just as limited. He suggested that the police were in the wrong for not being right there…in the street or even waiting in the yard for a call from some victim of domestic violence. Demanding more police….all the while damning our existence at every chance. This is just the same thing.

Again….you need to understand the (very correct) thinking) of the court cases behind this. Again….there maybe 1 per 8000-9000 citizens at any given moment….how can you hold that single officer responsible for protecting everyone…at every momment? That’s what the courts have recognized. We can’t be held responsible for not stopping the drunk that hits your family because we were elsewhere dealing with a domestic. We shouldn’t be required to babysit you because your marriage fell apart and you now have a restraining order…..when peoples cars are getting broken into across town by a bunch of doper kids swiping stuff to fund their marijuana habits.

This is just another ignorant soul with a very limited understanding of police work and the real world.

They already do, moron.

…

;;

I’ve looked. There is nothing on that page but idiots calling for violence. So much for Pete’s idea of “peaceful, consensual encounters.”

http://libertycrier.com/the-police-officer-impeachment-act-petition/

Shawn:
The numbers simply aren’t on your side guy.
Hundreds of warrant service each day…without incident.
100’s of thousands of police calls for service a week….without incident..
That’s not to say that occasionally we don’t get one wrong.
But your continued and repeatedly demonstrated misunderstanding/lack of knowledge about what the police do is…at this point quite sad. As is you inability to hold those responsible accountable for their actions.

But that’s still ok dude. I’m sorry that you have to live a life so full of hate.

They think the same of your life and people. If you think a cop won’t shoot you and yours dead as easily as that kid with a wii, you’re blind.

If you’re fine with that, then enjoy your ‘protection’ until it happens to you.

There’s your video, and at least as seen here, the jury understood (read: reduced charges)!

http://nypost.com/2014/03/03/charges-reduced-for-man-accused-of-brutally-beating-cop/

You have no idea what you talking about. Just reading your uneducated screed tells a reader all they need to know. You have zero comprehension of the court cases cited, none of these cases involved the cops not being at a home or at the scene of an accident. Every last one of them where about a cop being right there and doing NOTHING!!! That’s why the cases went to court. No wonder you’re a cop, you are qualified for little else.

Finally, a truthful response from a tax feeder on their inner selves.

Delusional comes to mind when reading this nonsense. Police have killed more innocent people since 2001 than our military has suffered in combat during the same time frame. Not to mention the countless thousands of pets killed too. Yea, really good job there boys.

I guess you have to have a good case of cognitive dissonance to be a cop.

It’s status quo for the police state.

Again….you think the extremely limited is the norm. The numbers scream that you aren’t right.

As for what you see. Guy what you see is through eyes that only see what they want. Again….your inability to see that police misconduct is at worst a statistical anomaly when you take into account all of the calls for service, traffic stops and citizen interactions that take place each day. Heck….in my PD only…our patrol guys handle around 25 “actions” a day. That’s calls or self initiated things. Figuring for at least 2people per action (a more realistic number would be at least 4 people)….100 guys per shift,….2 shifts per day…..it’s a butt load of activity….in just 1 PD. And all you know about (or think you know about) is an example that made the news somewhere.

And what’s so funny about that even is that in the twisted and goofy CBer mind…that 1 thing you heard about…it shouldn’t even be reported because according to the dumb CBer thought….the news never says anything bad about the police.

Dude, whatever it is the made you this bitter and such a hater….you need to let it go. Your life will be much happier when you realize that hating someone because that are holding people accountable for their actions is dumb.

Oh, BTW….have you still not figured out who it is that does the investigations and arrests (charges) in those instances when officer get arrest? It’s the police there guy.

“Your life will be much happier when you realize that hating someone because that are holding people accountable for their actions is dumb.”
I ‘hate’ that cops choose to resist accountability among their own.

You fail to see that police acceptance of police misconduct is not a statistical anomaly. It is the norm. Even the best cops will still choose Team Blue over right and wrong.

The ‘bad apples’ don’t define you. Your acceptance of them does define you.
So does your arrogant and bad attitudes when dealing with people.

Huh? What the hell are you spewing? That just made ZERO sense.

That’s almost what it appears was going on in the Albuquerque PD. Did you read the DOJ civil rights division report? If even 1/4 of what they found to be true, is! They make the Key Stone cops look like seal team 6!

Matt:
Wait….make sure I got this right:
You want me to respect HIS rights and opinions…..BUT…YOU don’t want to respect MY rights to express my opinion?

How long does it take you to shave both of your faces?

Actually, the ONLY lawful (legal) authority any governmental professional law enforcement has is when they are keeping their oath, following the US Constitution and, when applicable, the state Constitution that they are under.

The US Constitution has not given authority for ANY governmental law enforcement. It actually does the opposite by requiring the people themselves to train and arm themselves as the militia. There is NO such thing as a governmental militia (military or LE). The people and the Militia existed here in the USA before the states, or the US Constitution were created.

Thomas Jefferson, “Notes on the State of Virginia” (1782): “The law requires every militia-man to provide himself with arms usual in the regular service. But this injunction was always indifferently complied with, and the arms they had have been so frequently called to arm the regulars, that in the lower parts of the country they are entirely disarmed.”

It says it here within the Constitution of the United States of America; US Constitution, Article I, Section. 8, Clause 11: “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water”.

Granting Letters of Marque and Reprisal when they are needed to enforce the US Constitution, the laws, or defend the people and the nation. This is using private citizens in their own privately owned crafts to defend the USA and her people, this is using the Militia.

Clause 15: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions.”

This clause is very straightforward. The militia of each state is taxed with the defense of the USA and her people, not just with the defense of their state; and they are to be armed with weapons that can repel any invasions bearing modern weapons of war. Congress is required to provide those military grade weapons for the militias.

Clause 16: “To provide for organizing, ARMING, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of
the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”.

The Militia has as its constitutionally assigned duties to:
– Enforce the US Constitution and each state’s Constitution,
– Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which is constitutional laws ONLY),
– Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
– “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.

No one else was given that authority, not any law enforcement or the military. Actually the Military is forbidden unless the congress has declared war.

Clause 12 specifies that there shall be no military beyond that of two years.
The Militia of each state is charged with our nations defense here within the USA until and unless the congress has declared war and a “standing” military is raised: “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years”.

As James Madison, the Father of the US Constitution warned: “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare”.

Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, floor debate over the 2nd Amendment, I Annals of Congress: “What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to PREVENT THE ESTABLISMENT OF A STANDING ARMY, the bane of liberty….”

Samuel Adams: “It is always dangerous to the liberties of the people to have an army stationed among them, over which they have no control … The Militia is composed of free Citizens. There is therefore no danger of their
making use of their Power to the destruction of their own Rights, or
suffering others to invade them..”

“The Militia of the several states offers everyone the greatest degree of
equality with each other;
– Because EVERY able-bodied person from the age of 16 – 60 is the militia of each state.
– They, when trained, have the governmental powers to operate in every county, city, state, and throughout America when needed.
– Plus through uniformity; the Militia requires the same general duty of
service from everyone – though not all will have the same tasks as they can perform different tasks according to their abilities.

This is why the Militia offers the best protection against rogue politicians and usurpation’s for those serving within the governments, “We the people” protect our own natural rights and hold accountable those we put into positions of power by enforcing the US Constitution and each state’s constitution. When everyone takes a part in guarding the security of the neighborhood, county, city, state that they live in; plus the country when needed, it basically stops or makes it very difficult for a small body of people
to take over this nation. (Edward Vieira, Junior “Constitutional Homeland Security” Volume 1, the Nation in Arms”.)

In 1933 Joseph Stalin said: ”The United States should get rid of its militias”.

Since then those who serve within our governments have been working to do just that.

The US Constitution guarantees to each state its own “Republican form of government”. It is every state’s Militia that is the ONLY Constitutionally assigned force to “counter Invasions” and “Domestic Violence” within our nation.

George Mason: “When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually, by totally disusing and neglecting the militia.”
and “That the people have a Right to mass and to bear arms; that a well regulated militia composed of the Body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper natural and safe defense of a free State.”

James Madison: “… large and permanent military establishments … are forbidden by the principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”

The New Hampshire ratifiers called for a guarantee (the Second Amendment) that: Congress shall never disarm any Citizen…”.

The Pennsylvania minority at its ratifying convention demanded a
guarantee of a very broad right to arms, that: “the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and their own State or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game.”

Joel Barlow, Revolutionary War veteran, wrote “Advice to the Privileged Orders, in the Several States of Europe”, clergyman, theologian, popular poet, successful diplomat, and American whose political writings were debated on the floor of Parliament said of the US Constitution: “… not only permitting every man to arm, but obliging him to arm.”

Patrick Henry: “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the
government.”

There is NO lawful governmental law enforcement – federal or state.

Boo hoo. Nobody’s asking you to lift a finger. Just sit there and type like you always do.

Haven’t you seen the plan yet? His call for “peaceful, consensual encounters” will never really happen to his satisfaction. Look at Eyre’s history. He spouts and touts peace, love and hand-blown cop block week pipes, but he never got his way, so he advocates violence and uses police encounters as the reason – all while holding up the guise that he disavows the action. It’s just like Bernard does.

Oh look the trolls wiggle again.. Keep saying what you wish… We are winning as people in our world cares.. If they don’t in yours. Maybe you should reconsider the company you keep

That is right, he is a citizen. Cops are civilians and answer to citizens. Now, you move along, slappy.

I never said dont express you oppinon.all im saying is there is no need for insults,just because you dont like what someone is saying .you act like you have the right to bash some one just for there opinion.typical cop

Its always the police’s fault, even when they’re drawn in by these guys. Its sad, really.

Bill,
Without looking I know at the very least one case did not involve police being there. t. brings up the Public Duty Doctrine, and he’s right if clumsy. The government has a responsibility to the public as a whole but not to any one specific individual. There are exceptions though, including where and when police can be held directly responsible for the safety of a specific person. Search “public duty doctrine”.

Specific to police, PDD is really “they can’t be everywhere” so you can’t hold them responsible for not being there, before and during, when you needed them. They may have had a more dire call, or poorly assessed the difference between the two calls.

As for t., understand you are dealing with an incredibly egotistical and arrogant person. He appeals to his own authority. He has made the statement that he comes here “to bring the truth” ignoring that he’s just one cop with one opinion. Epistomological and psychological issues.

Cops are also citizens, stupid. A civilian is someone who is not in the military. Just ask CENTURION, he’ll tell you.

Where to begin.
It isn’t about what you (plural) get right but what you get wrong, what steps are taken (not cursory like the AZ DPS over Quartzite, AZ), and the implementation and effectiveness.

This is just your hackneyed argument “But your continued and repeatedly demonstrated misunderstanding/lack of
knowledge about what the police do is…at this point quite sad.” It says volumes about you and little about others. It’s why I used hackneyed.

So why did police throw a stun grenade into a suspected meth lab? So why have children been burned by the fires set off by stun grenades? So why are they trying to charge the guy that wasn’t there for the toddler that was burned in his crib? It’s all rhetorical of course, police made those decisions, and occasionally they try to blame someone else. If it goes without incident, no reason to blame anyone else.

Cops killed is also a statistical anomaly, even in the 70s, given the very argument you make by numbers. Especially given the nature of the job, “rush to the violence”.

“Oh, BTW….have you still not figured out who it is that does the
investigations and arrests (charges) in those instances when officer get
arrest? It’s the police there guy.” No, actually we do know and realize it is part of the problem. You remember that word I brought up a ways back, dialectic, well it’s why you’re arguments here are intellectually immature. I have no doubt that you have issues of how the ABA polices itself, or the AMA, or any other organization you don’t belong to, yet you won’t apply it to your own.

Ever heard of the VA? They policed themselves.

It isn’t until outside groups step in that true policing takes place, and that happens only when something so egregious has happened that it can’t be ignored. There is actually a reason for watchdog groups and politics. Right now the New Mexico APD are getting a taste. Didn’t they police themselves?

Why shouldn’t all organizations police themselves? What makes one special?

YF,
Yet, police claim they police themselves effectively. You only have to look at when they do. That’s proof enough. Don’t look at when they didn’t, that’s an anomaly or a whole lot of isolated incidents. But I repeat myself.

If there is a profession in the USA that too often seeks to blame others for their decisions, that profession is the police. A group of adults that use the excuse of “look at what somene made me do” across too many cases. For the immature, it means it’s applied too broadly.

Actually, the post pointed out that Florida requires that lifitng of a finger. What the post was arguing is why when police are clearly on the scene, they didn’t and weren’t punished if a citizen would be.
Granted, the post crossed jurisdictions. The NYPD aren’t in the same circuit as Florida, and really just do what they want. Until they are caught at it.

I typed this to your typing.

Well, I considered alluding to that but chose not to. The police at that instance did break the “Public Duty Doctrine” because they did have a responsibility to act by being there, seeing it. If that is what actually happened, they or he broke the doctrine.

Cowards exist in police departments. Brutes exist in police departments. Sociopaths exist in police departments. Their enablers exist in police departments. The real problem is the enablers.

He does overstate it. If you want to maintain that all you (plural) do brings only good to society, then you’ve done the same thing. You’ve made the same argument. It did seem nicer though, didn’t it?

Yet cops use civilian as if they are the military. Cops seldom use citizen in talking about others not them, they use civilian.

You should have thought before reacting. I agree with you that the use by cops of civilian is not only deplorable but indicative of a mind-set. You did mean that didn’t you by “A civilian is someone who is not in the military.” ?

Wow, you did the “isolated incident” with “the police report is the facts”, and then some sort of dirtying that had nothing to do with anything because it was about another incident. And then to wrap it up you did a “tu quoque”. I’m proud of you.

The problem is the APD actually has a pattern. Shame isn’t it that all organizations you need to justify with some real fallacious thinking may not be worth the effort? Do you work for the AMA? You could certainly make the same arguments, and earn money as a lobbyist.

Ray:
Wow…talk about “clumsy”. Your understanding of the public duty doctrine….which FYI is not law…is, almost infantile. The key phrase is “special relationship”. And it’s a very key phrase.. When you look at any police scenario…be it a traffic stop, a domestic dispute, an arrestee….a special,relationship exists (to varying degrees). In the bigger picture…which you, quite frankly sir can’t even begin to understand or grasp…is that the reasonableness of that doctrine and it’s application, benefits everyone. Someone like yourself who sits on a jury about a case where a restraining order was violated and the police…who may even have an active warrant to arrest the violater prior to the specific incident occurred….you would likely lead the charge to ‘punish’ the police for it. Not only is it wrong in the thinking….it hurts everyone as it is taxpayer money that you would wrongly be giving to someone…when the police did nothing wrong. You frequently….like most of the CBers….respond only on emotion and ignore fact and reason.

So keep your “clumsy” guy. You aren’t even close to getting dude.

Yep, they don’t police themselves well do they? Just another example of how a group fails to police itself. Bravo.

Now they kill more people because they deal with more people that are ill and have a greater chance of dying. Except by gun or positional asphyxia.

BTW, it’s the same outrage and it’s all over the web. False comparison by how you did it.

Now this is just funny by irony: “They are also insured and not properly held accountable. Their insurance just pays people off. Where is the outrage in this?” Do I need to explain?

ML,
t. is challenged when it comes to reading what others write. The rest of us are challenged to make sense of what he writes. We have the greater challenge, because we often have to start with HTF did he come up with that, and WTF was he trying to say. It’s frustrating, but we do have to realize he brings “the truth” because he told us he does. And he’s certain.

Oh, God, that turmoil of your mind that you pass for thought is almost too much to bear coming from an adult.

I’d like to tear your comment apart, it would be easy but long, however it would be a waste of time. There is nothing coherent to what you wrote. You make no point against what I wrote, nor did you clarify what I wrote.

Really, it’s all about me calling you clumsy. You wrote this whole incoherent comment just to get back at me for calling you clumsy. You would have better served yourself by being silent.

I will spend the time tearing your comment above to pieces if you make another stupid comment driven by your ego and thus devoid of any intellect. Go read what you wrote when your mind is quiet and not suffering from the chaos of your ego. What you wrote is not coherent.

Glad you didn’t aim that at Shawn. It would have backfired.

Just cuz I couldn’t leave it alone.
So if police misbehavior is halfway between your estimate and theirs, you leave us between the ignorant and the paranoid?

Maybe you don’t know, but this is about when police do wrong, and worse when they were following P&P. I have no doubt that you, or others here, would say police did no wrong by throwing a stun grenade into a suspected meth lab because it was allowed under P&P. You may agree it wasn’t the brightest thing to do but it was allowed so it’s okay. Do you grasp why it isn’t okay even if allowed? Do you grasp that just because police are allowed to do something doesn’t make it right? You do realize that PD’s have different standards as to what is right? Do you pick the lowest standard or the highest? I realize that question is fraught with value judgment.

I’ll give you my value judgment: you only hurt people when you have no choice, and that means no other options. Standing your ground with a person weilding a knife limits your options and you made that choice to limit your options, the knife-weilder didn’t. After all you could back up. (Okay, give me all the what ifs including a 5 year old 5 feet away that was in danger.)

Doesn’t satisfy that ego does it?, after all he should have complied. You shouldn’t have to keep your distance from him, you are the one that has to be in control. And more, importantly, you don’t have time for that shit. So shoot him, no one will blame you except the crazies that think you had other options. Like backing up. What fun would that be?

Don’t answer by reaction, ponder (and no that isn’t done in 5 seconds) and then make a response.

To be honest, you share the crown with RAD. He is actually more often coherent than you. Not right, but coherent. It’s hard to tell what you mean after wading through fallacy after fallacy in a swamp of rambling, disjointed thoughts. I know they mean something to you, but you share them so poorly that they’re meaningless except to the echo chamber mired in your swamp.
I’ll help you to understand how to make a coherent argument, but you have to ask.

bill this is why police behave like cowards and shoot people with knifes rather then using any other training to settle things with.. and your right those that have commented is our favorite people that bring senseless arguments and fill the purpose to bring attention to something we post rather then pose any true argument.. they have been losing step by step as people realize the old intimidation tactics does not work and the laws in place does not empower the police but restricts what the police may do. the only ones confused by this remaining seem to be the police and terrorist sympathizers

what you mean the officer did not shoot half the people in the car? oh wow they are getting to be even worse cowards any more

cops confuse rights as well.. show me that the state or any government employee working for the state has rights beyond yours! so many times i have heard the state has rights and yet i have not yet seen anything except a person that would have any at all. when working for the government an employee gives up many right under the constraint of the law

lol wiggle… you make the funny comments all the time vary entertaining

before you plead file a motion to show cause and they will dump in their pants.. they have 72 hours to respond or it is all kicked out by court rule. if your motion is denied then they have shown no reason to proceed .. therefore then challenge jurisdiction as this would clearly not be met if they could not show cause

LOL wiggle goes the losers…. to bad you just cant pose any type of valid argument.. but your great at attempting to state the terrorist doctrine

The “incorporation” was NOT created with the knowledge of or the people or at their request.

It is not lawful here in the USA that those who are put into position to serve various written duties assigned to the branch under which they are occupying a position change our government. That happens ONLY under a dictator, king, etc and is binding on the people who accept that form of government. We have not.

What I quoted applies since we are STILL a Constitutional Republic under the US Constitution. Just because Obama is currently having the Bill of Rights rewritten does not make it lawful – it just shows how much of a traitor to the USA he and his administration, the other two branches, and the DoD are to the USA and her people.

What is most amusing about this is that they HAVE zero authority without the US Constitution. So they think the NWO is going to give them power… they need to study history, they are always the first dupes to die because they have already shown they can never be trusted.

What about everything else short of cop shootings ….intimidation, coercion, assault, theft yada yada yada.

As long as the days off are without pay, I’m in. I think at least two months would be needed though. It may take that long to address all the idle handed cops forced to do their dirty work off the clock.

Kansas:
Sorry that you were all that mess. I stopped after you proved that I was right you have no idea what you are talking about.
“No knock” warrants…like all others….are issued…..wait for it..,,wait….after PC is presented to a judicial official. Just like the amendment that you are trying to misuse in saying that they are wrong….says that they are right.

Sorry if you wrote anything important in all that. The beginning was just so colossally dumb. That I had to just stop.

I knew that you didn’t get any of it. That’s why you didn’t understand the oath part either.

Wait there two face.

You accuse me of being fine with the ABA and AMA policing themselves….sounding like you agree (as you didn’t say otherwise about 2 groups that you like) and then in the next second you are bitching because a group you clearly don’t like… The VA….didn’t police themselves correctly? With those 2 faced its hard to know which mouth is spitting out that much crap.

I’ve NEVER said that I have any problems with “citizen” over site/review. Heck….on this site the CBers ten to hate that kind if review as once people really begin to know about the law and how police work and ten get to review ALL OF THE FACTS….they generally side with us. Let’s look at a CBer gave….Chris Donner. Te police FIRED him…TWO independent citizen review boards AGREED that he didn’t need to be the police….and still you guys bitch.
So keep you fabricated ideas an

In two months Albuquerque would cease to exist if the cops weren’t there.

What are you even talking about, you are just throwing around a bunch of name calling without making a coherent point. Can you even articulate specifically what is “wrong” in the article and why it’s “wrong” specifically? Quote one statement or premise in this article that you can refute and do so if you can.

1. You claim to be a cop in the same way I claim to have been in the Coast Guard, or whatever else either of us have said we’ve done. It’s only a claim here, as you pointed out. Yet I think you meant something else without thinking it through as to how it would apply to you too.
2. I have no cronies here. That’s a blatant mischaracterization that so very well illustrates your inability to think beyond shallow. I do respect some opinions here: YF, who stands alone as moderate; 31B, just a sensible person but definately filters all of it from his profession; JQP, the same but he isn’t a cop; Shawn, who isn’t moderate but does see the general issues, doesn’t fall for “isolated incident”, and sees through the excuses. You are one of the extremists, and too often just as incoherent.
3. I knew “clumsy” would fire your ego. The comment was gratuitous to do just that (it wasn’t necessary in the comment but was a guilty pleasure). So my “The government has a responsibility to the public as a whole but not to any one specific individual” was an infantile understanding? No it was your ego firing making you run off at the mouth, and stupidly at best. Do the “public duty doctrine” search I recommended. Who do you think I really meant it for?
4. If you want your claimed experience honored and respected, then you need to honor and respect the experience and ideas of others. But you’d rather denigrate theirs so as to elevate yours. I’ve met you over an over again.
5. If you want your arguments respected, don’t believe you bring the “truth” to us, make arguments that support your stance. Drop the infantile ego and argue like an adult.
6. I drew my definition of the Public Duty Doctrine from a Law School website, and confirmed it at police website. I knew it had to do with general and specific, but I like to check first. You might tell them that you, as a revealer of “truth”, consider them infantile in their understanding. I did my research first before making my argument, it’s what people do that made their living by argument rather than by force.

No, SCOTUS hasn’t said cops can stand around with their thumbs up their asses while watching someone fighting off a knife-weilding manic. Nor would the management of any police jurisdiction, except in the really corrupt ones. My aunt is one step removed from the police chief, and she’d move to have these guys gone. Admittedly, it may take a video for her to believe it.

I think you’re not reading the SCOTUS decisions correctly.

One thing about the example, it was on the subway and it was behind a closed door. If that was a subway car, once that door closes only the operator can open it. Maybe they stood around because they couldn’t actually do anything.

Oh precious Mary Mother of God, I said just the opposite. I wrote “I have no doubt that you have issues of how the ABA polices itself, or
the AMA, or any other organization you don’t belong to, yet you won’t
apply it to your own.” And it was downhill from there.

It’s why people here, except your echo chamber, say you make shit up. And it’s why when you use two-faced it has so much irony.

Incorporation naturally followed from the 14th. Make note that all those vaunted rights in the Bill of Rights only applied to the Federal Government prior to incorporation. A state did not have to follow the Bill of Rights prior. It did not have to “grant” you those rights. In fact everytime you bring up the Federal Constitution as applying within a state you are an “incorporatist”. That’s the irony.

Here’s a simple phrase to get a handle on what the USA was before the Reconstruction Amendments, “these United States”. After, it slowly became to be known as “the United States”. Again, if you go to the Federal Constitution before you go to the constitution of the state you live in, you are an “incorporatist”. You agree with incorporation.

Before I get dragged into the morass of the states accepted into the Union before the Reconstruction Amendments had similar governments (Louisiana an exception with the Napoleonic Code), that was a requirement to join the Union. It was not incorporatism.

He wrote “cops confuse rights as well.. show me that the state or any government employee working for the state has rights beyond yours!”. Well you’re confusing “authority” with “special powers”. Authority can be limitless, special powers are defined and have limits. It may be why you confuse your experience as making you an absolute authority, after all the state gave you “authority” rather than “special powers” from which the authority is derived and limited.

You give me so many hours of pure intellectual pleasure.

“Not right” about what specifically?

You know, that would be a good one to apply to police. It incorporates a lot of phases they use, but generally only to others. If there is a profession that makes excuses and whines it’s the police.

Remember Pinal County SO and Guerena the Iraqi vet? After the shooting we heard “he had weapons”. Fuck. He had a Border Patrol cap. Fuck. He had armor to protect him from our bullets (he wasn’t wearing it). Fuck. His brothers are criminals and he lives in the same cul-de-sac. Fuck. We’re trying the totality here. Fuck.

The “fuck” is each time the PCSO realized their latest excuse wasn’t flying. Their whole campaign to dirty the guy to excuse their actions failed. About a $2.8 million failure. And by settlement. Fuck.

And we are seeing that same excuse making with the toddler that was burned at about 50% of his body. It’s the mother’s fault (yeah because she should have known that a cop would throw a stun grenade that starts fires into a home wthout any fucking idea what was there) because she was in a “drug dealers” home. It’s policy and procedure (to throw stun grenades that start fires without any fucking idea what was there, even in suspected meth labs). What did the police find? The guy wasn’t there, there were no people standing guard, and they bought the word of an informant again and did nothing but a cursory investigation. But it is someone else’s fault. As for the SWAT being devestated, they should be, they did it, and they shouldn’t be appealing to others to feel sorry for them. They weren’t hurt, they did the hurt.

reduced? from 25 years to life, to “up to 25 years” – not much of a “win” if you ask me but if you want it, you can have it.

Figured that you would have a problem with understanding the US Constitution, THE government we are under and that ALL governmental employees get their duties from, and how they MUST be performed – including the judicial branch.

Modern law enforcement – both federal and state – violates the Framers’ and the peoples most firmly held conceptions of criminal justice written into the US Constitution. Governmental professional law enforcement were unknown to the United States until close to a half-century AFTER the Constitution’s ratification.

Law enforcement under our legitimate government was, and still is, a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped at all times to chase suspects by whatever means they had 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.”

Laws in pretty much every state still require citizens, as the trained Militia to aid in capturing escaped prisoners, arresting criminal suspects, and executing legal process.
The duty of US citizens to enforce the law was, and still is, a duty assigned to the people by the US Constitution. Many state constitutions bind citizens into a universal
obligation to perform law enforcement functions as the Militia.

Governmental professional “police” (as we know them today) originated in American cities during the second quarter of the nineteenth century, when municipal governments drafted citizens to maintain order.

Toward the end of the nineteenth century, they took on the role of crime-fighting. The goal of maintaining public order then became secondary to chasing lawbreakers. The police cultivated a perception that they were public heroes who “fought crime” in the general, rather than individual
sense. This “new” role followed the “bobbie” model of England in the 1830s.

Our country had cut its ties with England to develop our own form of government with LESS governmental involvement in the affairs of the people. The “new” law enforcement was incorporating MORE government into the affairs of the people against the US Constitution as is done in England.

The 1920s saw the rise of law enforcements new concepts developed and spread by J. Edgar Hoover. ‘His’ Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The FBI came to epitomize the governmental professional law enforcement in its sleuth and intelligence-gathering role. FBI agents infiltrated mobster organizations, intercepted communications between suspected criminals, and gathered intelligence for both law enforcement and political purposes.

Now you should realize most of what governmental professional law enforcement does is relatively new here in the USA; and that it does NOT follow our governmental “model” of individual freedom instead of governmental encroachment – the ONLY lawful basis that any LE has is when those serving keep their oath.

The constitutions of the our country gave no hint of any governmental professional law enforcement agencies. Nothing in their texts enunciated any governmental power to “fight crime” at all. “Crime-fighting” was intended as the domain of individuals as the Militia of the several states. The original design under the American legal order was to restore a semblance of private justice. The courts used to be a forum, or avenue, for private individuals to attain justice from a malfeasor; but over time a slow alteration of criminal courts into a venue only for the government’s claims against private persons turned the very spirit of the Founders’ model on its head.

I’m not saying that modern policing is extraconstitutional is not necessarily to imply that every aspect of police work is constitutionally improper. It the effect of modern policing negates the meaning and purpose of certain constitutional protections the Framers intended to protect and carry forward to future generations unless they keep the Oath required of them. Modern-style policing leaves many fundamental constitutional interests utterly unenforced, and makes crimes of things that are an individuals interest not a governments – state or federal.

For all the effort that went into the verbose three paragraph dodge with perfectly constructed syntax and spelling, you could just provide a responsive answer in one sentence.

“RaymondbyEllis Yankeefan • 2 days ago

A group of adults that use the excuse of “look at what somene made me do”

Isn’t it pretty much central to their whole mythology? That they are not responsible for their actions since they “don’t make the laws”, they’e just “following orders” and thus not responsible, or alternatively, that since they are “entitled” to “immunity” they are, again, not responsible for their own actions?

Okay, so you have nothing specific upon which to base your assertion that I’m “not right” then? So then by definition, that would be a baseless assertion?

God, I hope you wouldn’t comment about ship navigation, I was in the Coast Guard but I was an FT. I don’t know shit about ship navigation except what I was taught in boot and what little I learned aboard ship. Now as for the sales part, you’ve expressed your opinion on that profession often. So..

1. I’m extremely experienced in some things, but know that there are others who may have more insight, even those who haven’t done what I’ve done. I’ve learned to listen.
2. You would most certainly question someone’s knowledge on anything if they contradicted your opinion.
3. “I don’t just just go on some site and just read about things”, but when I come here and read you that is exactly what I’m doing. You are no more than anyone else that lives and works the legal system. When I read the blog of a respected lawyer with 12 more years of legal knowledge than you, and a finer understanding of the language, I am doing that too. I do that when I read PoliceOne (where, BTW, many of the commenters are just as blatantly illogical and ignorant as any of the worst here, and as violent).
4. Epistemologically, you’re trying to claim that only direct knowledge has worth. But there are issues with direct knowledge, it’s only as good as the depth and breadth of the person experiencing that direct knowledge. The other issue would be why do we have education? It’s all indirect.

Anyway, I have better things to respond to so I bid you farewell.

So by asking a question I made an assertion? Is asking you what did you say right an assertion? Isn’t it just asking you to prove where you were right? Isn’t asking me to prove you wrong a bare assertion that you are right?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-278.ZS.html Read the briefs and try to understand what happened. The referring vaguely to this decision is dishonest at the very least. It does not support the opinion of the “author” and this story loses all credibility with this deception. Simply put….a violation of a restraining order results in nothing unless the actor is in custody or can be located. Most actors seek to avoid being located. Absent the custody of the actor a warrant is be sought and alerts put out.

That is an odd comment to make.. We are against criminals not government.. It is the police that abuse the law and steal things and ask for bribes. And search your car for no other reason that you be white or black or they just don’t like you.. We object to no knock warrant being used at the wrong address and someone killed due to it… So if your looking for someone that just hates your pointed in the wrong direction

You have no knowledge here either

Dude, he’s just mad the Coast Guard (you) served and continues to serve it’s country without needing special exceptions to cover their incompetence. We’ll have our day where we use our training to destroy these undisciplined pussies in the next American Revolution. We don’t serve brainwashed thugs, we put bullets in them :)

Based on the many times you have mentioned our schooling, our education, or knowledge, and our very opinions, weather those expressions of thought are right or wrong, you have no evidence to measure that against us and the weight of your own training of thought, or vice versa. The fact that you demand proof that is plain and clear for everyone to see. You’ve turned your knowledge away from public displays of unlawful behavior by police, that is called “ignorance.” You’ve admitted that you believe the tax payers are paying you fees that are owed to you, because, you willingly agreed to perform a basic, peaceful, and publicly open civil action without force or threat of arrest, detainment, or armed threat, yet you believe you are owed a generous amount of respect that you do not show us; that is called “hypocrisy.” You have witnessed public video and testimony of your fellow officers breaking the law, yet you ignore their actions, you deny their wrong doings, and dismiss any wrong doing to the people; that is called “corruption.” You are ignorant. You are a hypocrite, you are corrupt, you are disrespecting me, you are breaking the law; how would you like me to arrest you based on my statement alone? Oh wait, I can’t, because you have more legal privileges than us, therefor you do, in fact, have more rights granted to you than us. When step above us, you have permitted us to pick up arms and bring you down, and there is no argument you can make against what is written in our Constitution; unless, you’re just an uneducated punk who lies about his knowledge of the law, and insults the obvious and well earned knowledge of others out of envy; like being mad because we have a bigger dick than you, and your madness is making me believe that is the literal problem as well.

Came back for a moment.
“”Ray is the smartest guy in the room”. There, how was that? There had never been a more stupid comment than that.”
Absolutely, and you are the only one saying it because you make shit up and think it’s real.
I’ve explained to you otherwise, that I only think I’m smarter than you, yet you still think it’s what you make up.
Learn to argue and support your arguments with something other than easily recognizable fallacies, or just go away. Quit taking the easy way out of ad hominem.