I decided to make a short post, hot take style, on something that has been on my mind.
When someone is shot in a police interaction, most libertarians, myself included, will oppose statements like “well he should not have resisted the police” usually coming from the conservative side of things. Certainly a police officer should not kill you for failing to “respect mah authoritah” [sic]. Even more certainly police officers should be less prone to violence, better trained and so forth.
This is assuming a world where such things as police exist, of course. I am not covering alternatives at this point. So ancaps pipe down. The problems with police forces are many. But the alternative is not as clear cut or elegant as some think. So, for now, we have them.
We can talk of solutions like better hiring practices for police, more training, more accountability, changing police culture, or a favorite of libertarians, drastically reducing laws and so called malum prohibitum crimes in order to reduce police interactions. In fact, these are the things we should focus on.
But this is not my question at this time. All these solutions being applied, there would still be police and laws. And police will need to enforce these laws. So a question still stands: to what point can a member of the public resist the police? A law not backed, in the end, by force is no kind of law at all. If everyone decided to resist arrest in every situation and the police did not use violence, that society would be lawless. You’re under arrest! No, thanks… Well you don’t get to decide that…
Whatever society you have and form of organization, if someone breaks the rules there will be an enforcement mechanism and simply resisting / refusing to acknowledge it will not work. Be it citizen posse, cops, private security, exile. The only alternative would be the rest of society being united enough to shun offenders or something. Or kill them if they get violent. But, in general, unless one’s view of society is one with no rules, which is patently ridiculous even for anarchists, some of those rules will need to be enforced and this implies using force at some point.
So the question on my mind is: “when and how can one resist the police, if said police is the legal (and more or less legitimate as some like to make such distinctions) authority in that certain jurisdiction?” Sometimes? Always? Never? Or to differently phrase from a more conservative point of view, should you never resist the police?
Well, and this may remove my libertarian credentials, my view is you should probably not resist physically/violently. Little good will come of it. Resist verbally as much as you can. Afterwards, make the case you were unlawfully arrested. Organize a peaceful protest. Sue in a court of law. Write your representative. Or the mayor. Go on TV. But I see no situation when resisting arrest is a good idea. You will be arrested anyway and you may get hurt and this will not help the cause sufficiently to be worth it.
I personally would not do it in any case. I may argue with a cop, but if I were ever in the position to get arrested, I would go peacefully, even though I am too pretty to go to jail. Off course, when I say resist verbally as much as you can, I mean if you really must resist or really want to, a better choice, all things considered, may still be the oldie but goldie, “don’t emit a single sound without a lawyer.” But that is up to each one, and one’s mileage may vary. Myself, I would probably shut up in any arrest situation, but as Ron White used to say, some people have the right to remain silent but not the ability. 
First of all, I do not see a situation working in which people can simply ignore whatever rule or law they don’t like. I support resistance to bad laws, laws that infringe human rights. But I support peaceful resistance. You may get arrested. Scream if you want. Call attention to the problem. But physically fighting police is not, in my view, productive.
Again, this does not mean you should be killed or crippled for it. Police should know better, and restrain someone, if needed, in the least damaging way possible. But physically resisting the police will sometimes lead to bad things. It cannot be helped. And in case of very violent people, police – and private citizens for that matter – can be justified in using deadly force.
It certainly does not help the cause of police reform among those not already on board. When someone sees a person with a criminal record who was further breaking the law and was then resisting arrest violently, sympathy will certainly evaporate. A lot of police shootings were straight up murder. But a lot more were murky.
Some will say, the what if peaceful resistance fails? And we are not talking resistance against a general tyrannical government or revolution, a different topic entirely, but resistance against specific laws and law enforcement. Violence will rarely lead to anything good and will also fail. And in my view this is sometimes said when peaceful resistance options were not exhausted. Every single time the police stops someone for no reason, document it, make it known. Mobilize large peaceful protests. Make your case. This is not easy, and I am not saying it is. But the alternative is worse.
Even in the grand scheme of things, I cannot see a way a libertarian world can be brought about with violence. This is why I don’t think I will see one in my lifetime. Any major social change, in order to be positive and successful, needs people to be convinced to get on board. If libertopia is ever implemented, it will be when a majority of people are philosophically libertarian.
Many 19th century socialists said of Marxism, and later Leninism, that it will do nothing but replace a ruling class with an even more brutal one. While I do not think socialism is either moral or possible, at least it was acknowledged by some of them that if a vast majority of the population is not on board, it will certainly be bad. And it will not be good if brought by violent revolution. Which was proven by every single attempted implementation, followed by violent persecution of the wreckers.
This kind of change is more often bad than good. Because the most brutal will take advantage to get on top. This is a cold hard fact. So no matter how frustrated one is with the state of things – and libertarians are very frustrated – violence will rarely help and the odds are not in your favor.
I have heard this in many situations. People are desperate, people can’t take it, have reached the limit. But no matter the situation, doing something that will make things worse is a bad idea. And it is a sad indictment of culture and education that people cannot realize this and have just enough rational thought to stave off the worse emotional reaction.
It is the same with people voting for authoritarians who promise to solve their problem. A lot of those people have hard lives. But authoritarian leaders, in general, will only make them harder. So no matter how bad a situation, applying a solution that is known to not only not improve things, but possibly make it worse is not good. I heard people trying to understand people who support authoritarianism, they were desperate, and they had no choice. But they did have a choice – anything else. And, frankly, I don’t care how desperate they are. Just because you are desperate does not give you the right to use authoritarian violence on others. Sorry. Life is hard. Much, much harder on some than others. As harsh as it may sound, sometimes thems be the breaks. A nonviolent non authoritarian solution needs to be found.
As most, I feel less outrage when someone with a track record of violence is met with violence. This does not mean I am ok with it if the violence is disproportionate. That I think it should happen, if it can be avoided. That reform is not needed.
And this is an important thing to keep in mind. To vaguely paraphrase Mencken, standing for liberty and rights means standing for scoundrels. It is easy to condemn police for shooting someone not resisting. But they should be condemned for shooting someone who was resisting, as long as there was a reasonable alternative. A lot of people feel little sympathy for criminals, and often so do I, depending on the crime. But, as little sympathy as one feels, the police should not be judge and executioner. That is not the way for a society to go. Standing for the rights of criminals is crucial. But I am unsure of the wisdom of focusing too much on these cases, as a way to change minds
So that being the case, looting and burning private property, assaulting people is never, ever justified. It does not matter how hurt you feel, how near the edge, how sick and tired. The moment you start indiscriminately attacking people and property is the moment you lost my sympathy for good. Also, and this is irrelevant to my basic view but I shall mention it nonetheless, violent protest for people with criminal records who were physically resisting the police is bad marketing. As harsh as it sounds, in countries of millions of people, marketing matters. Looting and burning private property will achieve the opposite of less police violence.
So, you know, stop doing that, would be my message to both people physically resisting arrest and protesters.
I’m livin’ in a Firster’s paradise.
A place where no one cares so you don’t actually have to be good at it?
Or you can just mentally omit the ‘r’ and let him enjoy his kink.
2020 is giving us a good long look at what lawlessness looks like. It’s actually worse since the law still applies to some people but not others depending on jurisdiction, skin color, optics, and political affiliation. I don’t think it’s a place where the most heavily armed country in the world can exist for long.
Dave Smith calls it “anarcho-tyranny” – where the cops are not protecting life and property of innocent, uninvolved people, but they will absolutely bust you if you try to defend yourself.
They’ve monopolized domestic defense and then declined to actually perform that function when the shit gets real.
I don’t see how anyone could look at this situation and not do some serious questioning of the whole idea of government, or at the very least admit that Lefties own most of our institutions that are supposed to prevent this kind of thing.
They go with Joe’s plan to roll that shit through the out suburbs – people, including cops, will be getting shot from hundreds of yards away – well off camera.
Yup. They make it illegal to defend yourself, and absovle themselves from the duty do to so too. And then the DA’s release the people doing the damage.
And then the DA’s release the people doing the damage.
To me, this is one of the biggest issues in any discussion of cops. The number of people committing property crimes that face little or no punishment is absurd. But a fucking grow operation? Let’s go, baby!
I can’t recall where I read it, but cops are the pointy end of every shit politician’s bad deciscions.
I think that was that tattoo that’s older than me.
This. It isn’t so much the cops, it’s the political machinations behind them. They get told how to enforce the law, they get told what laws to enforce.
I definitely want police reform, and there are very strong avenues to pursue in that. But no one should expect things to be perfect, no one should expect the real world to not intervene.
I posted this a few days ago – how California dealt with the 69 Berkeley riot. There is a clip from then Governor Reagan scolding some lefty academic journalist.
Actually, i’m not sure. The problem “IMO” isn’t so much thath they are super prone to violence, its that they know there are little consequences for being violent. I don’t want cops (even ancap ones) to be pusy footing it with violent criminals. It’s that the scope of what they are allowed to justify the use of violence is too broad.
I think that should raise a lot of flags. There is little to no consequence (even with this most recent upheaval) for their actions. Its shoot first, sort it out later and get your union protection and hide behind the notion that all your interactions will lead to your death if you didn’t shoot first.
Yep. Lack of accountability is the core problem.
damn, I spent too much time talking and got beaten to the punch.
This
And it’s tricky to think of solutions because it always seems to end up as one of two things:
1. Form another government department to investigate them (in which case you have people on the same team as the cops doing the investigation)
2. Form some non-governmental organization to investigate and punish them (which probably wouldn’t be respected or obeyed since they’re not a government organization)
3. Insist our elected representatives do their jobs and supervise the entities that are supposedly under their control.
Form a board of criminal DEFENSE lawyers to investigate and, if warranted, prosecute them. Our system only works when the sides are in opposition. Having your buddy from the DA’s office absolve you is meaningless.
criminal DEFENSE lawyers
Good luck finding enough in good standing with the bar to populate a board.
*winks at Ozy*
I’ve noticed that it seems like many libertarians are of the “catch him when he’s in bed” persuasion. As long as the fool isn’t actively committing a violent crime, just let him go home and swoop in at some later time to pick him up when he’s not expecting it. Oh, and you can’t actually arrest them in the house because that’s too dangerous and no knocks are off the table. You have to sit there and wait for them to be strolling to their mailbox and jump on them there.
I’m really skeptical that anything would change if cops disengaged in the moment, letting an agitated, potentially violent person go on their way. All you’ve done is deferred the violence until a later moment.
It obviously gets complicated from there. When you’re arresting somebody for a non-violent (non-) crime, the injustice of the accusation clouds the arrest. It also gets complicated when the chance of additional crimes being committed is low.
I’m not reflexively pro-cop, but I’m also not reflexively anti-cop. My opinion is that the answer is more “around the edges” than a foundational transformation in policing. I think it all comes down to more transparently defining where the limits of their power are and increasing accountability when they exceed their rightful power.
no knocks are off the table – they should be maybe with exception of a special warrant for an extremely dangerous individual
“owning a gun *is* extremely dangerous!”
Or something.
they should be maybe with exception of a special warrant for an extremely dangerous individual
To be clear, I agree with this (and probably wouldn’t even have the special warrant exemptions). The point was that you can’t back the cops into a corner where they’re not allowed to actually arrest anybody unless it’s the 3rd Tuesday of the month, a full moon, and the accused is whistling Yankee doodle in the key of E.
I saw people around here saying this about the Blake shooting and my thought was how in the hell can you expect the cop to just let him get into a vehicle with three kids in it after he violently resisted arrest? While having a warrant out for sexual assault?
While having a warrant out for sexual assault?
And back at the location of said assault (in violation of a TRO). I sure wish his victim had been armed when he came back, capped him and then called the cops to come pick up the body.
Except when the cops actually arrest extremely dangerous individuals like Whitey Bulger, they wait outside his residence and then surround and grab him when he walks out to get the paper or go for a cup of coffee. Because busting in guns blazing is too fucking dangerous.
Yep
If there’s actual danger, they have no interest in playing cowboy.
Back in the day, I had to repo stuff. Non-confrontation was the mission. Who the fuck wants to catch one for a car that isn’t even yours?!?
And yet, we got everything in a timely, safe manner. Even an airplane, once!
If there isn’t an imminent threat, fucking wait.
This seems like apples and oranges to me. You can wait until I’m away from my car and tow it away at a very low risk of confrontation/violence. How does that work when the goal is to arrest me? Besides lucking into a situation where I’m totally unprepared (one of the reasons used to justify no knocks) , it’s gonna be a confrontation, and I’m gonna make it violent if that’s my goal.
The assumption baked into the “catch them in bed” philosophy seems to be that aggravated people are only aggravated in the moment, and that they’ll compliantly go to jail if you catch them at home after they eat a snickers bar. It feels like deferring violence to me, not reducing violence.
You can wait until I’m away from my car and tow it away at a very low risk of confrontation/violence.
Yeah? You ever see those shows? 😉
But I still think damn few of these no-knocks are that time-critical.
Just like Kentucky, it’s all relative ?
I think it all comes down to more transparently defining where the limits of their power are and increasing accountability when they exceed their rightful power.
This, and a couple of other things.
First, of course, drastically reduce the victimless crimes.
Second, remove responsibility from the police for social work. Let them do law enforcement only, and stop the scope creep of policing.
A good list
Probably the most common use/justification of a no-knock is the “they’ll flush the drugs down the toilet” canard.
Those should be explicitly outlawed.
And judges who sign no-knock warrants should be held liable for the actions of the police who implement them.
If I was a Judge: “Does he ever leave the house? Okay – arrest him then.”
“they’ll flush the drugs down the toilet” – not a problem if you decriminalize drugs
But highly likely if they keep falling out of your ass.
I also really have a hard time when they accuse the person arrested of shooting at them.
You broke his door down and didn’t announce it was johnny law.
And even if you did “announce” it was the cops, someone startled awake by black-clad men busting into their house at 3:00 AM screaming something won’t make them assume it’s police and they shouldn’t defend themselves.
Absolutely.
If the amount of drugs in the house is so small that flushing down the toilet is effective, then you didn’t need to do a violent entry in the first place.
And even if there are 100,000 Oxy pills in the house….. simply turn off the water before you knock to serve the search warrant. You can’t get much down the crapper in a single flush. They could also put a trap on the cleanout, if they really were concerned about it.
Dynamic entry should be exceptionally rare.
Today it is a commonplace method of serving warrants.
Quick story.
‘Round about 1990, I was living with a pornstar. She kicked her husband out so I could move in. Her husband had previously been a bank robber, back in Florida (where that kind of thing was more tolerated back then.) After she kicked him out, he had no more porn money to keep him in whatever he needed kept in, so he started robbing banks again. Got about three of them. This was just a month or two after he got kicked out. When they identified him, his address was still the same..house I was now living in.
One night, around 3 in the morning, all the windows and doors opened with a loud bang. Seemed like 10 dudes rushed in, yelling and shouting and pointing all manner of weaponry at me. They grabbed me by my hair (which was waist long back then) and dragged me all the way into the living room. As they were handcuffing me and collecting themselves, she ran out and said, ” NO!, it’s not him. The guy you want moved and he lives at XXX whatchamacallit street!” With that they let go of me, removed the cuffs and ran out of the house. Turns out they caught the guy. He only lived about 3 blocks away. I drove her down to have the kids visit him a few times while he was on trial. We broke up about 9 months later because she kept returning to her heroin habit.
Well, that story started like a Penthouse Forum letter..
I left out all of the ” I never thought this would happen to me…” stuff. Family rating, amirite? Anyways, my general try and be a good guy demeanor limited my ability to take advantage of the situation. Not to say I didn’t to some extent, just not nearly to the extent I could have. Too much “and telling” already.
This is the version that comes after every one of those penthouse letters.
So ancaps pipe down.
*sits back down, grumbling*
Even in the grand scheme of things, I cannot see a way a libertarian world can be brought about with violence.
Well, since a foundational principle of libertarianism is non-violence, you are probably right. However, what about an out of control state? Is resistance, en masse, more akin to self defense?
Specifically with regard to the cops, I agree with you. Resisting arrest is almost always a failure. Unless you have the numbers on your side, the teeth of the state can chew you up and spit you out.
WRT the looters, fuck them. They are pieces of shit criminals who deserve a speedy trial followed by some restitution. Ten years of hard work to pay back the people whose lives they destroyed sounds pretty good to me.
Good article, Pie! Thank you!
Bonus points for the Ron White quote.
I’ve been waiting for a way to work “You got the ‘Tater” into a political screed. It is surprisingly difficult.
Well, since a foundational principle of libertarianism is non-
violenceaggression, you are probably rightI think the difference between anarchism and minarchism is that minarchism accepts the essentials of a sovereign state, which has a legal monopoly on the initiation of violence in certain situations. If all the law enforcers are allowed to do is talk at you, then we have #AbolishedThePolice and replaced them with social workers.
I would say there’s no such thing as a society without violence, libertarian or no. The question is, how best to minimize it. Allowing violent criminals to remain free to ply their trade unless and until they voluntarily surrender seems unlikely to minimize violence. So, it seems like someone should be permitted to initiate sufficient force to arrest violent criminals.
Allowing the sovereign free reign to commit violence, regardless of the situation, also seems unlikely to minimize violence.
Of course we can’t have a society without violence. Violence is baked in our DNA.
A focus on proportional response and a commitment to removing violent criminals from the game is compatible with nearly any liberty focused structure.
The question always remains who and how.
I don’t believe there is any amount of reform that can overcome the fact that Cops have a Monopoly, and as long as you are forced to only purchase their services, they will continue to act like shitheads.
meh… the police forces differ quite a bit in brutality, from country to country and county to county though all have monopoly. I am a minarchist because I believe there needs to be a final authority in conflict resolution.
I am a minarchist because I believe there needs to be a final authority in conflict resolution.
Same here, for exactly the same reason.
I don’t think anyone ever got it better than Madison: “If men were angels there would be no need for government”.
And of course because men aren’t angels, power must be divided – checked and balanced. Our LE problem is that there is no check or balance since the creation of qualified immunity.
Great Article Pie. I think i agree with you. Resisting arrest only makes things worse for you, if you are in a society where you can generally believe that the process will be ‘fair’ in the sense that its not a tyrannical political prosecution (thinking getting sent to the gulags, etc). The people who showed how powerful non-violent, civil disobedience didn’t get off. That is why it worked, because people saw that it was unjust.
And why blm and antifa just set the police fixing prospects back a decade.
Of course that was never really their objective.
And the people currently yelling about police still want police.
They still want the irs to have a bunch of guns.
I agree as well. Non-violent protest of the 1960’s civil rights marches and sit ins were successful where the riots in many cities just resulted in burned out city blocks. Resisting arrest in general results in a dead or injured person.
As you and others have said above, restricting the laws that justify arresting someone would reduce many of the problems associated with the act.
After 6 weeks of drought, my vacation begins with 3 inches of rain over the last two days with more in the forecast.
Scenario 1: Officers arrive at your home with an arrest warrant. Do not resist, get booked, make bail and fight it out with the courts, hoping that it is as you have learned and we have a just system.
Scenario 2: Officers suspect you of committing a crime and immediately arrest you or attempt to. Do not resist, get booked, make bail and fight it out with the courts, hoping that is as you have learned and we have a just system.
I know I repeated, but it is all predicated on the notion we have a just system and we are being shown we do not. It is a political justice system now and why would I allow the State to do that? What is one supposed to do?
why would I allow the State to do that?
Because the alternative comes with a very high risk of permanent, violent consequences.
I don’t think the advice to not resist relies on the assumption of a just system. It relies on the assumption that being a political prisoner is preferable to being a martyr.
Rochester.
Ok, maybe one word doesn’t cover it.
We were discussing “what would you do if a bunch of BLM bee-atches burst in on your meal and started demanding that you raise a fist in solidarity. A couple of more events and the general consensus was “I’d certainly feel like sending the wife away with the kids and then opening a can of whup-ass”.
Then I saw the video of Rochester. 400 lunatics rush your table, with a solid 6’5″, 280lb dude or two leading the way.
Yeah…. to continue the Ron White theme… “I don’t know how many of them it would have taken to whip my ass…. But I knew how many they were gonna use! That’s a handy piece of information to have.”
If the justice system means you are probably going to die without resisting, then the actual risk of dying doesn’t increase much by resisting. Of course the chance of living happily ever after doesn’t improve either.
On the down side of the “Physically prevent them from searching” path – now you have a bunch of immunized agents of the state that are pissed off with you and who have the authority to wreck your home looking for stuff, with no obligation to pay for any of the damages.
This is exactly what I’ve been thinking.
Yeah, the cops shouldn’t be executioner. But they have to be able to, or none of it matters.
There’s no getting around what makes a law a law.
Sowell was talking about policies, but I think it fits here too.
“There are only tradeoffs”
“There are only tradeoffs”
That is the bane of the idealist – the one who thinks a beautiful theory will work. It is hubris to believe you’ve worked out all of the nuances and subtleties of human behavior.
We had this discussion with the “No shooting fleeing felons” debate. We got rid of that – and crime is down.
We had this discussion with the “No high speed pursuit if it is dangerous to bystanders”. We seriously limited that. And we still catch the bad guys.
That being said… at some point law is backed up by force… or it does not exist. At least not for the worst of us.
Just look at what is happening in the proggie cities. Prosecutors have promised not to prosecute “protesters” (rioters). That brings out the sociopaths and the criminals. Just look at the criminal history of the people involved in recent deadly events. They are all violent repeat offenders. That is not a coincidence. Nor is it an accident.
Removing the possibility of punishment is permission to those sorts of folks.
Italian study – Hydroxychloroquine Reduces Risk Of Death From COVID-19 By 30%
Interesting and it’s not even the ideal usage scenario. From what I’ve seen it works best by far when given early with zinc and an antibiotic.
Gives an easy low-ball estimate of how many people the HCL banning Governors killed.
This guy didn’t read the article.
Resisting an arrest: sometimes it works.
A couple standoffs have succeeded.
More standoffs have ended in some deaths.
And then there’s Waco.
Sure. Numbers matter.
If you honestly believe placing yourself into custody will significantly increase your chances of suffering bodily harm or death in the immediate future, don’t do it. Don’t resist/fight, run. Run your ass off and at least make them work for it. Apply this tactic to any encounter with a group of armed people who insist you go with them, not just cops.
The likely outcome of running is suffering bodily harm when they do catch you and a resisting arrest charge to go with it.
Possibly. But if I genuinely believed they’re going to hurt me regardless then the extra charge would be worth the chance of escape.
I’ve seen a few ‘undesirable’ people in my life who had this look of helpless horror come over their face when getting picked up. They still went along quietly yet oddly enough, when we picked them up from holding they were still bruised up and had a resisting arrest charge added. Funny, that.
Cops do love to slap them some resisting charges on top of, well, just about anything. Nothing is more ludicrous to me about modern policing than seeing some cop bitch at some suspect their manhandling to stop tensing up when they’re trying to cough them. And they’ll slap that charge on based on it.
Stop doing that perfectly normal human response you’re doing in response to my aggressive behavior!
That’s if the person is “tensing up” at all and the cop isn’t just looking to fuck with them.
But, yea, resisting arrest/running is still dumb.
For the vast majority of us, I agree with you. I guess I’m just trying to point out that for a small portion of the population, especially the poor with no family or support system, and possibly some mental health issues to boot, you can find yourself literally at the mercy of a sadistic group of beat cops who has decided to make your life a living hell. The law can be violently lawless when you’re in their hands when nobody’s looking or cares about you.
I think the fact that some people are viewed as little more then prey by the authorities can give those people good reason to just say fuck it and run no matter what.
Some of the sheriff’s deputies I see around the courthouse are so fat that they would literally have to lift up their side-gut to draw their gun. Running is completely out of the question for them. How the fuck are these people still allowed to be LEOs??
f you honestly believe placing yourself into custody will significantly increase your chances of suffering bodily harm or death in the immediate future – how likely is that? if rather likely, that is something else that needs reform. if you go peacefully there should be no harm.
See my response to Brochettaward.
No discussion of thief-takers?
London got rid of them in the end
That doesn’t mean we couldn’t bring them back.
aiming for thief taker general?
Biden: “I want the job of that Sniffer guy from Fal Dara!”
Aid: “It’s not THAT kind of sniffer, Joe.”
1. Pie is a lie. This was not a short post.
2. The main gist of it is that resisting arrest is just dumb. Which is the reality of the situation. You almost certainly aren’t getting away and you greatly increase if not guarantee that you are going to get roughed up if not worse.
3. On top of the beating you are going to get, you will get another charge added to whatever they arrested you for in the fist place.
What we see in a lot of cases where people resist:
1. They aren’t in the right state of mind. By which I mean they are mentally ill or intoxicated in some way.
2. They are desperate individuals who know they are looking at doing time. See Jacob Blake’s dumb ass. Or that guy in Georgia who was shot at the Wendy’s.
3. Entitled and/or stupid people in general. People who have never had their asses kicked and who don’t realize that, yes, violence will be used against them if they do not comply. And no, there likely is no recourse.
I kind of roll my eyes whenever I see the stories about the old ladies who refuse to comply with cops and then get roughed up. The entire situation is absurd, but these are people who live in a fantasy world.
. This was not a short post. – under 2000 words… seems short to me
The only time to resist arrest is when you have a genuine (and reasonable) belief that you won’t make it to the station. Otherwise, spending a night or two in a cell isn’t really *that* big of a deal. If you’re a single parent or have other similar circumstances, it can be distressing, but resisting even an unlawful arrest will not make the situation any better.
The other part is that if you don’t resist, even the sadistic cops will generally have little interest in thumping you.
genuine (and reasonable) belief that you won’t make it to the station – how often does this happen in the US? I think if the cops hate you that much they would just shoot you outright not arrest you… unless to many witnesses I suppose.
For fans of The Warriors.
ANTIFA is just burning with enthusiasm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Awb89q_9rg
the hotstepper is still my fave… followed by Hello! Ma Baby one straff linked
For those who missed it.
Never gets old 🙂
I’d vote for Yakity Sax myself
after a fairly long time got a demolition ranch video in my recommendations
fk brno psd pistol look good aesthetically
OT… holy crap.
Not only did Amazon get a package to me, on time, across two major bridges – they got another package to me a day early – and left both at my door instead of six floors down in the lobby. And left me a photo of my front door to prove it. This must be their drivers or something? Cuz I’ve never seen this functionality before.
two packages? decadent consumerism…
I did say ten Hail Gretas for penance.
Yeah, that’s their drivers. It’s been common here for a while… they still don’t follow delivery instructions though.
No they do not. “Do Not Knock” apparently means “Ring the Doorbell” to them.
Interesting. I guess they just started up around here.
I’ve never considered adding delivery instructions. Well, except when it was UPS and their habit of making you sign for shit and play Post-It tag with them.
LOL… I’m in a corner building with a front door on the street different from the address. Despite our Amazon address actually saying “FRONT DOOR IS AROUND CORNER ON XX STREET”, our packages routinely end up on the neighbor’s stoop.
The place where I buy my protein powder is located in Idaho, and I’m in Ohio, but they somehow get it to me the next day. And I’m not even selecting the expedited shipping option. It’s freaky.
pea protein?
If you have excessive protein in your pee, you should get your kidneys checked
Nah, whey protein.
My vegetarian brother uses a blend of pea and rice protein powder which apparently makes a complete protein. The pea stuff tasted like nasty feet, and the rice stuff was like little tiny granules that never dissolved, and the last sip would be a slurry of week-old foot sweat with very fine silica sand mixed in. Disgusting.
To me, this generally falls into a category of “you shouldn’t have to, but….”. I thankfully have had relatively few interactions with cops, mostly just traffic stops, and not even that many of them. When I have had such encounters, I am polite to the point of being obsequious because I don’t want to give the fucker any excuse to slap some bullshit charge on me, get rough, or worse. When I was a lad and my dad played old-man baseball, one of his teammates was a state trooper. He gave me some good advice on how to avoid speeding tickets, and he also told me what to do when you get pulled over. He acknowledged that there are a lot of jumpy cops out there who will escalate at the drop of a hat, so he said the best thing to do is pull over, put the window down, shut the engine off, and put your hands on the top of the steering wheel and keep them there. On the one hand, it’s ridiculous that anyone should feel compelled to do all this to avoid a potentially violent confrontation with police. On the other hand, I value my life enough that I see no reason not to be cautious.
Were I in a situation where I know my rights are being violated, I would say so but in as non-confrontational manner as possible. You have to recognize the power imbalance in the situation and accept that you’re in a position of extreme weakness in that moment. Document what you can, get names, record if possible, and pursue a complaint later.
Pretty much what I am teaching my soon to be driving teens. Take the ticket, we will fight it later if it wasn’t justified. Only thing I add is at night, turn on the dome light, and place your hands on the wheel. It is a position of weakness, but I want you home, not in the clank or worse.
Girlfriend in HS has a cop dad. He told us his sure fire way to get out of speeding ticket. He told us keep a water bottle in the car. If we saw lights to pour it on our crotch and tell the cop we pissed our self. He said they’d either feel bad for you and let you go, or think it was a funny prank and let you go. I’ve never tested his advice.
Seems like a good way to trigger a roadside sobriety test.
Hah…his advice was more along the lines of stay out of the left lane as much as possible, be careful near the end of the month because a cop short on his quota will start pulling over people for a few mph over the limit, use a rabbit, etc. Also said to always go to court to pay the ticket because most cops aren’t going to bother showing up.
A rabbit?
In other words, follow someone who is speeding. That’s your rabbit. The idea is that the guy in front of you will be the one to get pulled over.
A car driving faster than you but within line of sight. They flush the hidden cops out for you.
How do you keep them in sight if they’re going faster than you?
IMO that only works with a large lead. If you’re following too closely, the cop’s going to be lazy and nab YOU.
So you basically have to keep enough distance where you can barely see them so that if they pass a cop you won’t also pass the cop before he can get out of his position.
I had some asshole cop claim that I was racing on the highway when another vehicle pulled up alongside me and then sped off.
Oh that would piss me right off.
People play games like that on the highway and I’m so not interested. It’s why I’ve pretty much forgone the whole “rabbit” thing and just keep a sharp lookout. If I get nailed, I get nailed, but I just want to get where I’m going.
He acknowledged that there are a lot of jumpy cops out there who will escalate at the drop of a hat, so he said the best thing to do is pull over, put the window down, shut the engine off, and put your hands on the top of the steering wheel and keep them there. On the one hand, it’s ridiculous that anyone should feel compelled to do all this to avoid a potentially violent confrontation with police.
It’s remarkably similar to deescalating an encounter with a potentially rabid or vicious animal.
Agree with Pie’s ponderings.
Without reading any other comments… I will add that we’re not gonna get anywhere towards “solving” these issues as long as all sides lie and distort and cover up what really happens. And maybe it’s my imagination but the lying and distorting and covering up seems way worse than can I ever remember.
You read my First, though, right?
It’s the only one that really matters.
It is ok to fight the cops….in court. Arguing or engaging in violence with the police on the street is dumber than dumb. It ends in failure every time and destroys any credibility. you may have in court later.
Cops dont make laws, neither are they free to choose their own course of action. Those are dictated to them by their higher ranks and ultimately by elected officials.
Giving the police a financial incentive to enforce petty regulations is a bad, bad, bad idea.
Violence is a course of action taken by people who have no convincing argument or just plain uncivilized alpha male types that have learned at a young age that violence and barbarism get them what they want.
Public service unions are a really bad idea.
There, I pointed out the problems so I leave it up to y’all to find solutions. I am too tired.
I have been doing machete and chainsaw work since sunup. I am very tired. I am going to shower, brush the sawdust out of my teeth and heat up some of Mrs. Suthenboy’s delicious beef/vegetable soup. I may nap then.
Since I got on the wagon I have been full of energy….Glibfits – I have lost 7 lbs and gotten my strength and stamina back, not to mention caught up on a lot of tasks that I let get behind. I have been so busy that I have had a very hard time keeping up here so I just lurk and read dead threads. After shower and nap I will probably mop the house and then drop in on the evening links.
I hope everyone is having a wonderful day. I am. Despite my being tired I feel like a million bucks.
I have been doing machete and chainsaw work since sunup – that is more than 12 hour. impressive
You joke but there was a time when I could. Unfortunately those days are long gone. Now half of that is my limit on a good day.
I delayed my shower for coffee.
Despite my being tired I feel like a million bucks.
Fuck yeah. Congrats, man.
I think we’re in broad agreement. The thing about the three cases that have generated the most attention lately, from George Floyd to Rayshard Brooks to Jacob Blake, is that in every case the person involved had committed or was about to commit a felony, in roughly increasing order of severity, and resisted arrest. If I weren’t sympathetic to the cause of police reform to begin with, the choice of cases to talk about would make me unsympathetic. In every one of these instances, the police were enforcing a law, though I think in Floyd’s case they probably could have let him go*, and the nature of the law they were enforcing meant they couldn’t just disengage. The mentality that “drunk driving is murder” leads directly to Brooks’s death. The idea that the police shouldn’t leave people to die at the hands of their abusers leads directly to Blake’s likely permanent incapacitation. This is where the rubber meets the road with regard to what the law is and how it is enforced. And I cannot deny to being pushed away from sympathy also by the reaction of many of the same people who would in other places and times chide libertarians for being hyperbolic when pointing out that there are too many laws and the ultimate enforcement of every law is death. To be told I don’t care about all of this when I was pointing out this is how it fucking works in the first place, and that we’d end up in OMG TEH SOMALIAZ** if we repeal even one law but heaven forbid anybody*** who fights the police when enforcing the law is met with force in return, is greatly off-putting. But then I remember Kelly Thomas, Daniel Shaver, Breonna Taylor, Philando Castile, Tamir Rice, and the dozens of others who were killed or abused by the police without provocation. It nevertheless angers me when the two types of cases are conflated together.
* = It is arguable whether the police arrested Floyd more for the alleged counterfeiting or more for his palpable intoxication; the latter is a more urgent enforcement target, especially if operation of a motor vehicle is involved
** = The average person throwing around the name Somalia as a juvenile counterargument also knows fuck all about the country’s history or present state
*** = Except trailer trash, they deserve it
Yes, and that is precisely what the rioters and looters are taking advantage of. The genuine protestors aren’t doing themselves any favors by mostly refusing to disavow the power-seeking Marxists in their midst, either.
In short, this situation is reaching maximum shit-show with no end in sight that I can see, with everyone talking/screaming/gibbering past each other and at cross-purposes. The Marxists are loving it.
I copied the same sentence. You are correct. The commie cockroaches dont care one whit about black lives or police brutality. If you think police brutality is a problem now let the marxists get power. Then we will find out what real police brutality on a large scale is like.
Their goal is to disrupt, provoke and destroy the current power structure, society and culture as a whole. I am hoping Trump will win though I am not as confident as I was in January. If he loses I think this chickenshit communist insurrection stands a much better chance of succeeding. If Trump wins they have zero chance of succeeding.
If I weren’t sympathetic to the cause of police reform to begin with, the choice of cases to talk about would make me unsympathetic.
This.
ABC News doesn’t want to argue over ‘oo killed ‘oo
The story in Charlottesville is also more complicated, but that didn’t matter to anyone in the MSM, so why should this?
This is supposed to be a ‘Appy occasion!
prescient.
So much covid stupidity today.
Cuomo saying it’s all Trump’s fault, the bullshit study about 250000 infections resulting from sturgis, from all the college kids having 0 hospitalizations. This fucking thing is going to break me because of the physcosis and stupidity at play. I don’t know how people are supposed to remain sane from the obvious bullshit being peddled by so many people who are either the biggest pussies in human history or just liars.
LOL the Sturgis one…economist….fuck off. That article is nothing but pure doom-porn
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/09/08/sturgis-motorcycle-rally-may-have-caused-250000-coronavirus-cases-economists-say/#276be23d45fa
The paper also attempted to determine the economic impact of the rally and claims that “if we conservatively assume that all of these cases were non-fatal, then these cases represent a cost of over $12.2 billion, based on the statistical cost of a Covid-19 case of $46,000 estimated by Kniesner and Sullivan (2020)”
That does not sound conservative to me.
TMITE
But it’s the story of the moment. I heard about it on two radio stations driving to work this morning. Because the national media, in unison, hands out instructions to the general public on what we’re going to talk about on a daily basis.
“…may have…”
In other words “….may not have…”
Last I heard there was only one cootie casualty superficially linked to the Sturgis thingy and the guy was a fragile diabetic. I may not remember that correctly, but I think that was it. I remember rolling my eyes when hearing about it and thinking it was bullshit.
*why does spell check accept bullshit as a compound word but not horseshit? It keeps wanting me to make horseshit two words.
Yes, just one (so FAR!) and they are falling back on that the type of people that go to Sturgis aren’t the type of people that would go get tested so their numbers of infected are artificially low and the sick are lurking out there…
Same here, I just heard the one guy is all that died as a result of the rally. It ended three weeks ago so if there are going to be more they would be in the news within the next week or so.
I assume they WILL make sure we are all aware of who went to the rally and died.
I don’t know how any of us in this family are going to remain sane. Four people working/schooling from home, 3 of us in about 250 square feet, and our internet connection tested to its limits. XY’s wireless isn’t working, so he sent an email and bailed on school for the day.
It’s been very quiet, except for the cats fighting like they’re siblings or something. Oh, wait…
Before his wifi went out, XY spent his in-between-class time weed whacking.
Mr. Mojeaux will figure out his wifi issue after he’s finished working for the day.
Mostly successful first day. We will see how this goes, but all four of us cooped up working/schooling together after having been cooped up together since March NOT all of us working/schooling together–especially with winter coming on and windows getting closed–is going to drive us all batshit insane.
Now I know why, in These Happy Golden Years, Mrs. Brewster got all up in Mr. Brewster’s face with a carving knife in the middle of the night.
Assumes facts not in evidence. ; )
If it’s not too hot (or later, too cold,) take periodic breaks to go outside and breathe. Repeat as necessary.
If I were sane, I couldn’t write the shit I do.
I don’t know how you do it Mo. We were bursting at the seams with 5 in a 900sqft condo and a dog and cat to boot before we moved and I wanted to strangle any living thing near me.
Oh, sorry, no. My house is huge. It’s just that all the office space is in the basement and was, at one time, solely my domain. There’s nowhere else in the house to set up shop that doesn’t freeze in the winter and isn’t a sauna in the summer. Then Mr. Mojeaux came (back) home to work. The kids (last semester) were at the dining room and/or their rooms, but school was a joke.
Right now XY is in a bit of trouble and so his being my officemate is a punishment. It is also MY punishment. That said, today was pretty smooth except for his wifi issues. Our router is buzzing it’s working so hard.
Whew…was worried you were all on top of each other.
?
Not that it was ever a joy, but I can barely tolerate my Nextdoor feed right now due to the lying and distorting about Covid-19 on both sides, which quickly devolves into schoolyard taunting. It’s my hope that the reasonable people in my community can still think for themselves and don’t want to wade into the sty.
I’m not saying it was aliens, but…
French investigators have made numerous arrests since a macabre series of attacks left scores of horses mutilated or killed this year and have opened more than 150 investigations into such cases, the interior minister said Monday.
Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin announced the start of night patrols by gendarmes to reassure horse owners and to try to nab attackers. He said police have opened 153 investigations on the horse attacks, about 30 of them concerning deaths or “extremely violent injuries.” There are no known breakthroughs. …
The minister spoke after visiting the owner of a horse who was a victim of the mysterious attacks in the Oise region, north of Paris. He refused to comment on the only arrest reported in the French media hours earlier in eastern France.
Knives have been used to slash the horses and, in some cases, mutilate them, with organs sometimes removed. A horse’s face was disfigured in one case and blood was drained in another. Often a right ear is cut off like a trophy.
I learned here that horses are assholes so I have little sympathy.
La Bête du Gévaudan stalks the French countryside once again!
Despite the ornery, pushy nature of most horses that has to be one sick fuck. Whatever happens to a child or animal torturer/killer it is too good for them.
It is a near certainty that they will up their game to people soon. They really need to catch that fucker.
^^
This reminds me of a Sherlock Holmes story where a murderer was practicing on sheep before going after his actual target.
Very reassuring.
“You said on election day it’s over, but it well might not be, right?” Axios asked Zuckerberg who replied: “I think the dynamic that you’re talking about is really important, which is that we may not know the final result on election night.”
Zuckerberg went on to add: “One of the things that I think we and other media need to start doing is preparing the American people that there’s nothing illegitimate about this election taking additional days, or even weeks to make sure that all of the votes are counted. In fact, that might be important to make sure that this is a legitimate and fair election.”
Zuckerberg discussed how Facebook plans to facilitate that stating: “So, we’re going to do a bunch of different messaging around that, just to make sure that people know that that’s normal. So if one of the candidates in any of the races claims victory before there’s a consensus result, then we’re going to add some informational context to that post directly saying that there’s no consensus result yet.”
If the votes are not at the required location on election day then they don’t get counted.
The only date that really matters is December 14, 2020 as that is when the electors meet. The news media would do a better job to talk about how our elections actually work instead of making up bullshit.
They don’t want an educated consumer of news otherwise they would be out of business.
Yes. Once the electors vote the game is over.
It is near impossible to cheat with the EC, that is why they want it gone so badly.
Seven days ago I voted in the primary for a vote-in candidate. She had to get 2000 votes to be on the ballot in November. Still no word if she received enough votes.
“Democrats are setting the stage for something, what it is isn’t yet exactly clear. They are moving in unison along with the mainstream media to predict that Biden will win the election based on mail-in ballots counted in the weeks after Election Day, Trump will refuse to leave office, and then … well, then what?
None of this can be coincidence. The memo has gone out.”
https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/09/somethings-happening-here-democrats-laying-foundation-for-action-with-their-post-election-day-doomsday-warnings/
This tinfoil is making my head itch.
See the thing is that the Dems have decided that regardless of the election, Trump will not be in office come Feb 2021. Him winning, is just evidence that he is refusing to leave office.
What matters is what result the electoral college passes to Congress. But it does seem like they are trying to draw out the process to foreclose legal challenges, as the precedential outcome of Bush v. Gore is that the campaigns and states have to act quickly to enjoy the “safe harbor” provisions of electoral law for recounts etc.
How people are not terrified over statements like that is beyond me. They have cornered their argument like you just said; he is leaving office either way, just have to figure out how it will be done – ballot box or otherwise.
Drumpfler so stoopid.
The big excitement for Democrats on Monday was a tweeted video that allegedly showed a confused President Trump wandering around the White House lawn, unable to find his way to Marine One: …
The video had over 2 million views before Twitter labeled it a “manipulated media,” and Tom Joseph deleted it. (Joseph, incidentally, is utterly obsessed with his belief that Trump has “Frontotemporal dementia,” proving that, to a hammer, everything’s a nail.)
In fact, the video shows a chivalrous Trump, having finished talking to the media, circling back to make sure his wife doesn’t step in a puddle:
These people are acting like its 1999 and only the young know how to navigate the internet to find contextual videos.
If you’re in an encounter with police, I highly recommend saying nothing except some variant of the following:
“Respectfully, officer, I do not wish to answer any questions, and I do not consent to any searches. Am I free to go?”
Last time I was pulled over, had to say it twice, then they gave me a ticket and let me go.
Assaulting a police officer or giving them back talk is stupid beyond belief. The have the de facto ability to murder you and suffer few if any consequences.
Shorter: any encounter with a police officer is potentially deadly. Politely try to get out of it as quickly as possible, by shutting up.
More importantly, consider the outcome of any charges you may face. Spending the night or weekend or any amount of time in jail sucks balls, but it’s better than a conviction and sentence. Allow whatever suffering they put on you right now, if it prevents them from acquiring evidence to be used in trial. Most of the people who wrongfully confess think they are going to end their immediate suffering, but it does neither.
I had one officer ask me “Do you know why I pulled you over?” I answered “Not my job to tell you how to do your job”. He scoffed, scribbled the ticket and left.
“Do you know why I pulled you over?”
Because you failed out of community college?
There’s a meme for that.
https://pics.me.me/maam-do-you-know-why-im-standing-here-you-got-27285312.png
*sensible chuckle*
Me: *mad, upset, zooms past a dirt-and-dust-addled crossover SUV type thing*
Cop: You zoomed right past me. Didn’t you see me?
Me: Your car is filthy; how was I supposed to know you were a cop?
Cop: Don’t get smart.
Me: Well, you asked.
Cop: *chuckles* Yeah, I did. You’re a long way from home; what are you doing all this way down south?
Me: *starts to cry and give a convoluted version of the truth*
Cop: *sigh* All right. I’ll let you off with a warning.
I don’t know if he bought the story, which was TRUE, but I’ve gotten away with speeding more than I’ve not gotten away with it.
I’d advise any white female to cry. You can all do it on demand, anyway.
“I’m guessing it’s some kind of revenue quota?”
This is my problem with giving more “training” to cops. They get fucktons of training as it is, but apparently none of it ever tells them not to ask questions like that. First of all, it comes off as entrapment (flat yes = cheeky, flat no = lying, a specific thing = admission of guilt). Secondly, it sets up a poor dynamic between the officer and the individual who is pulled over from the outset. Third, it’s frankly unprofessional: tell me why you pulled me over, don’t play some silly game with me.
Thankfully, I only ever had one cop pull that crap. I did break the law (83 in a 65) but he was also an asshole who acted like I was going to kill his grandma in the left lane of a freeway where the prevailing speed of traffic was 75-80 anyway.
“Is the brat in the trunk signaling for help again? I thought I had that thing locked down tight this time.”
This. I lived in an unincorporated area where the tiny police force had to face elections every year where the residents decided whether to keep the police force or fire them. The couple of times I had an interaction with said cops, as soon as they saw my ID and realized I was one of said voters, they became extremely polite and deferential.
That’s how you hold them accountable – you can fire them and replace them with different officers.
This reminds me of that saying someone around here used to throw about that the cops serve the public, and the public is everyone but you when you’re interacting with them. You aren’t their customer or their paymaster when dealing with them. Having the people they harass determine their job status would be an interesting idea.
That is how it works here and it works very well.
The bigger problem is that they are in charge of determining if they have violated any laws/rules. They work closely with prosecutors everyday and then the prosecutors decide whether to charge them. Bullshit! They need to be answerable to DEFENSE atty’s. There needs to be opposition. AND, they should not be able to use public resources for their defense except as garnered through normal discovery rules. no free experts, deep dive investigating or anything. I gotta pay for mine, they oughta pay for theirs.
a family member arrested after being assaulted by some career thugs even though witnesses said my family member was attacked. Spent the weekend in jail and had charges dropped. My family filed a complaint for false arrest etc and the cops then did an amendment of the original official report and tried to re-arrest my family member. Second set of charges dropped and the review board found no wrong doing for the police department. So sure, go ahead and file a complaint and the cops will bleed you dry and determine they did nothing wrong.
Great article, Pie.
may still be the oldie but goldie, “don’t emit a single sound without a lawyer.” But that is up to each one, and one’s mileage may vary.
I often hear this repeated here but Massad Ayoob gives a pretty convincing explanation of why it’s a horrible idea to stay 100% silent following a self-defense shooting (pertinent advice with current events). Lawyers tell their clients this general advice because virtually 100% of their clients are indeed guilty and are unable to utter a single word without fucking themselves over.
Cops need a victim and an aggressor for their report. You can choose to shape this narrative or allow the cop to form it on his own. The guy laying dead on the floor who attacked you is doing a pretty good impression of being a victim with the pool of blood and lack of breathing. You’re doing a pretty good impression of being the aggressor having pulled the trigger that killed him. Don’t let the cop stack the deck against you from the beginning by setting the narrative with you as the aggressor and the guy who attacked you as the victim.
After very briefly telling what happened (I was walking to my car and this guy jumped me while brandishing a knife and demanded I hand over my wallet), then you stop talking and redirect any questions to your lawyer. The advice to not answer any questions and keep your statement brief is solid, but refusing to identify yourself as the victim without having your lawyer present isn’t the best look from what I’ve heard Ayoob say.
Lawyers tell their clients this general advice because virtually 100% of their clients are indeed guilty and are unable to utter a single word without fucking themselves over.
To be fair, innocent people are pretty bad at not incriminating themselves, too. There is a list of examples a mile long where an innocent person talked the cops into investigating/arresting/prosecuting them because of gut intuition, some admission that made them look guilty, etc.
Absolutely. The advice is to give a very short statement and then refuse to answer any follow-up questions without having your lawyer present for just those reasons. His point is that refusing to very briefly and truthfully state that you defended yourself is not helpful when you are victim. However, refusing to give such a statement is beneficial advice to the vast majority of lawyers’ clients in most cases.
The crucial part is knowing the pertinent laws. In the case of self defense, it’s pretty plain most of the time. “Guy had a knife” “Told me he was going to kill me” “Ran at me” etc. Lot’s of other laws are not so clear.
When I was younger, I was a traffic outlaw. They kept suspending my license for unjust reasons and in defiance I would just drive anyway. I’d get busted and hauled into court. They’d always ask ” have you ever been convicted of this before?” I’d think it was an honesty test or something, so I’d tell the truth. When I got to the third one, I bought a book on how to beat tickets. I found out that they were sneakily evading their responsibility to prove my priors. Absent my admission, they’d have to acquire an abstract from the other courts to apply the priors.
The next time, I responded, ” I don’t believe that responding to that question is appropriate” They couldn’t apply the priors and treated it like it was my first! Fighting back feels good! Once I had enough tools to win, the cops started taking less interest in me. Well, that and the Rodney King incident happened, which seemed to mellow them out quite a bit.
I think the X factor is one’s emotional state. If youre of sound enough mind to say “he was gonna kill me… I had to shoot him”, great.
If all that comes out is “I killed him… I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry… it all happened so fast” , not so good.
I’m thinking that we’ve taken some of the same classes..
I can’t remember which one now but I heard it on a podcast where he was interviewed. I hadn’t heard of Ayoob before but enjoyed it.
Voter fraud is a myth.
1000 is no small number and that can easily swing many elections as these continue to get tighter and tighter.
Rhode Island’s Senior Ballot Harvest
This. My wife and mother-in-law were scoffing at notion that BLM had violent leftists rioting in Portland, saying it must have been racist right-wingers bused in, since Oregon used to be a really racist state.
I pointed out the BLM is a straight-up Marxist organization, and that if actual protestors go to an event organized by BLM, the organizers are gonna implement their agenda, which is NOT about the lives of black people mattering, it’s about communism. I said actual black protestors protesting police killing black citizens need to boycott any event organized or attended by BLM, and publicly disavow that organization, or the events are gonna continue to be about looting and rioting, not protesting.
Aaaaand a long moment of silence followed.
I could conceivably be with someone I disagree with about politics. I don’t think I could be with someone so delusional that they actually buy narratives like secret Nazi rioters.
Also, I don’t do consensual relationships.
I don’t know if you can call what I have “relationships.” Perhaps more like encounters where the one party typically doesn’t have any more encounters after.
STEVE? is that you?
I’d like to say i have a hard time believing this, but the media and the politicians of these areas have been pushing that this is just right-wingers doing all the violence since the begining. It gets hard for them though, because of all the BLM activists who then took to twitter to defend looting and violence as appropriate moves after a police shooting.
I am reminded of the probably apocryphal story of the Japanese media reporting on each glorious victory of the IJN and IJA that just happened to keep getting closer to the home islands than the last such “victory”.
If the people rioting in Portland are all boogaloo bois or whatever the term du jour is, why are the police practicing catch-and-release? If everybody is a white supremacist, how did all 3 of the people Kyle Rittenhouse shot end up being the poster children of antifa thugs?
This whole “the damage and violence of the peaceful protests is being perpetrated by white supremacists” gambit is the most in your face, piss-on-me-and-tell-me-its-raining strategy I’ve encountered.
I’m sure an even bolder straight-faced lie will come along in the next day or so.
Did this make the rounds earlier. It just popped up in my feed. Appropriate for this…
Police shoot 13-year-old boy with autism several times after mother calls for help
We will all wait breathlessly while the officers involved have a paid vacation and are determined to have “followed procedures”.
The mother seems to be living in la-la land though. “He’s a baby” does not apply to a 13-year-old.
I found her belief that cops should come and do her job as a parent to be more of an issue.
Meh, I have an aunt who is severely mentally handicapped and she is prone to anger when she doesn’t get her way. That woman once pulled a Jaime Somer and tore a sink faucet clean off because she’s strong as a horse. She’s really angry, really strong, and really intent on getting what she wants by any means necessary. She has an animal cunning that is focused and calculating. And don’t give her anything sharp around her sister because she’s tried to kill her twice now. And that was when she was 50-something.
Yeah, I can totally see a 13-year-old kid who’s not all there doing something the mom can’t control, physically or otherwise.
I think there’s an interesting question raised by cases like these. The state’s only real tool here is confinement. That used to be insane asylums now it’s jails. If a person is intellectually disabled but prone to violence how do you handle it? For the most part, people with severe intellectual disabilities can understand that violence is unacceptable. But when they can’t, or won’t, then what?
Exactly. My aunt knows perfectly well violence isn’t acceptable, but she also knows nothing will be done to her. I was the only one she was afraid of because she knew that if she pushed me, I could and would beat the shit out of her, which was something no one else was willing to do. (BTW she was taller and stronger than I have ever been and I’m pretty fucking strong.)
The lesson here should be that cops should not be the lead in responding to mental distress situations. In this situation, maybe sending someone by who has training in talking down autistic people in distress, with a cop (or private security) accompanying them for safety?
I don’t think that the police should be defunded, but they should be severely descoped. Cops aren’t a Swiss army knife problem solver.
My wife had an institutional home client where the < 18 year old patients had severe intellectual disabilities and many were physically violent. They had private security guards spread throughout facility and one was always in the room with her when she treated a patient. She saw them take down patients many times in her brief visits there.
I doubt the guards had much training and weren't highly paid but still managed professional interactions with the patients and didn't kill anyone. Another model like you propose would be interesting and probably much cheaper if cops could be descoped and reduced.
the bullshit study about 250000 infections resulting from sturgis
I was wondering, earlier, what phantasmagorical number the “modellers” had come up with for Sturgis.
50,000 dead? More? But the media steno pool keeps slavishly (and credulously) repeating their nonsensical blather.
Dan Rather on Atlantic’s Trump Story: ‘Whether He Said It or Not, It Is Believable to a Lot of People’
Well there you have it.
I was hoping after he disappeared in disgrace he would have stayed gone but naturally like moths to a flame do liars glom onto the gullible.
He was just ahead of his time. His reporting would have fit right in with today’s journalistic standards.
“Well you could believe he said it!” is a far cry from actually saying it. This trying to make Trump Guilty because people really don’t like him.
Mr. Fake But Accurate might want to sit this one out.
Also, he might as well say: “My industry has spent four years flinging outrageous slanders at Orange Man, so it must really say something about Orange Man’s character that they believe this slander.”
In the finest Dan Rather tradition of “fake but accurate”
“Nobody has proved that they were fraudulent, much less a forgery. … The truth of this story stands up to this day.” – Dan Rather
It Is Believable to a Lot of People’
Not to anyone who acknowledges the constant fellatio he gives the military.
He is a piece of work, alright.
To think this guy once had the nation fooled into thinking he was a paragon of journalistic integrity….geez.
When they get caught lying you realize it was all an act, purely a performance. Someone should give Rather an Oscar…oh wait, he got caught. Ooops.
I flipped around the radio dial today, and they were flogging this on NPR big time, along with other stuff clearly meant to hurt Trump in the eyes of neo-con types. I assume polls are showing some weakness for Trump there. It was kind of funny because it was quite a contrast from what they were saying in the 2004 election.
My personal rules for engaging with law enforcement:
1) Avoid at all costs.
2) Where 1) is not possible, say nothing.
3) Where 2) is not possible, say as little as possible and be polite.
4) If being detained or arrested, remain calm, do not resist, and like OBE said upthread, sort it out in the legal system.
Easier said than done, I know.
Given the alternative is being ventilated with a 9mm at the slightest hint of non-compliance, this is probably good advice.
Awesome as always Pie!
https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/08/vindman-not-whistleblower-was-driving-force-behind-impeachment/
The officer Corp in the united states is very sick.
Well, that about sums it up. He was willing to upend the entire government and put his own personal prerogatives over those of an elected official who was also his commander-in-chief, but deep down he was just so loyal. Loyal to what, I guess, we’ll never really know.
Republicans really are cucks.
What Trump was truly impeached over. A bunch of people in the deep state got pissy that the president was, you know, setting his own foreign policy and not listening to the career foreign policy experts.
I know I recall correctly: Every single witness at the impeachment was asked directly if they had witnessed any evidence of Russian/Trump collusion or evidence of any criminal activity by Trump at all and they all answered unequivocally “No.”
The whole thing was a farce. To this day I am not sure what they claimed was the basis for that sham.
Vindman’s complaint was that Trump was pushing his foreign policy agenda instead of letting Vindman, an unelected, unaccountable bean counter set policy. Fuck that arrogant son-of-a-bitch. Same goes for the rest of the so-called deep state. Unelected, unaccountable career bureaucrats who think they are entitled to set policy that has the force of law.
I blame congress. Those shitheads have been weaseling out of their responsibility for far too long by deferring to nameless, faceless desk jockeys. They have created a shadow government by doing so and heads need to roll.
That Forbes thing about Sturgis is even dumber than I imagined it could be.
Well done, Forbes writer. Malcolm must be whirring in his grave hard enough to light most of the homes in the state of Montana.
Running from the cops is about as smart as running from a bear.
Hey, i only have to run faster than you.
Protests Erupt As Police Shoot Man Who Was Just One Gun Away From Being Unarmed
This one’s old but gave me a chuckle.
https://babylonbee.com/news/nations-fathers-engage-in-time-honored-ritual-of-telling-their-kids-they-havent-seen-them-since-last-year