Rayshard Brooks shooting

Discussion in 'Off Topic Area' started by Van Zandt, Jun 15, 2020.

  1. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    You're right.

    I'm sorry that your authoritarian plutocracy doesn't afford you the same freedoms as our tyrannical monarchy. :D
    axelb, Dead_pool and Grond like this.
  2. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    axelb, Dead_pool and David Harrison like this.
  3. aikiMac

    aikiMac aikido + boxing = very good Moderator Supporter

    Yes, it is, actually.

    I'm shocked that you believe that (1) arrests and (2) going to prison, should be optional. That is the necessary conclusion from your position that it's totally fine to resist arrest and shoot cops with their own weapons.
    Hey, just win the fight with the cop, and you can go free.
    If the cop cannot wrestle you into submission, you go free.

    If you don't want to go to prison after your conviction for any heinous crime, just resist the arrest, and if you can escape the marshall/sheriff's wrestling grip, you go free.

    (shrug) That's what you argued, and it's insane.
  4. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Would it be though? In practice I wouldn't recommend it but I am curious about the legality.

    I don't know the law so happy to admit I'm talking out of my rear but I can see the argument that an unlawful arrest would be, by definition, illegal, and self defence is defence in the prevention of an illegal action. While in practice I can see fighting a cop leading to either death or a conviction anyway, like I say I'm not sure if the theory is all that backwards?
  5. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    In some states in the US it is lawful to resist an unlawful arrest, and in the UK it is lawful to resist an unlawful arrest. Resisting arrest isn't even on the statute books in the UK - you can obstruct a police officer in the course of their lawful duty, but if they are acting unlawfully then no such obstruction has taken place.

    Going to prison is an entirely different subject, and you appear to be working from a "guilty until proven innocent" theory when it comes to citizens, but also presuming that the police can do no wrong. Police rape, assault, abuse, steal, murder, and commit any other crime on the books. If any arrest is automatically lawful, then you have just given police license to kidnap members of the public at will, arbitrarily, with no legal recourse. That is insane.

    Again, I'll point you to Peel's principles and the foundation of modern policing. It is built on consent, but that seems to have become an alien concept to many in the US.


    It seems to me that a return to these principles could solve a lot of problems.
    Dead_pool likes this.
  6. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    David Harrison and Grond like this.
  7. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    As a student of people like Dr. King, Malcom X, and W.E.B Dubois, I can't help but feel the helplessness of the situation under discussion. You've got to understand, many people are so sick and tired of police heavy handed brutality, they no longer respect any authority. That's not just a US thing, either. And it's not their fault, it's the fault of the culture of conformity that some of the more hard-line police and their supporters promote. In other words, if you're not in line with the police and don't kiss their butts like they are annointed, you're Public Enemy #1. That, in a civil democratic society, is an immoral and irresponsible position. Ironically, the same people who tend to rah rah the jack booted police are the same ones who cling to their guns, cite the Second Amendment, and claim it's all about keeping the government in check. Yet they are silent on the issue when the people being oppressed by militant governments are different looking from them.

    "Otherism" has wide ranging complications, the least of which is if the drunk guy running from cops at the Wendy's had not been a poor minority, he'd probably be alive today because the cop involved would have said to himself "ah, this guy just needs a night in the tank". Meanwhile Ray got life eternal in the ground. He was human, you know, and humans love to fight back when cornered like any other animal. The cop who kicked him after he was dead, also smirked for his mug shot. Because he knew he had all the power, even after he was arrested. They don't call it the Blue Wall for nothing.

    ned and David Harrison like this.
  8. aikiMac

    aikiMac aikido + boxing = very good Moderator Supporter

    I don't know where that is true, but I know where it is not true. It is not true right here in this here place where I live, which is in the USA.

    The premise behind the claim is faulty: who decides the legality of the arrest? You can't say the bank robber gets to decide the legality of his arrest for bank robbing. Plus, "resisting arrest" is itself a separate charge, so, you've created an unworkable spiral of offense.

    Not even close. I'm just pointing out the unworkable insanity of your suggestion. You literally said none of the following events are so bad that a person should be arrested:
    (1) violating the terms of parole, and (2) driving so drunk that (3) you outright pass out behind the wheel of your car in the drive-through lane of a restaurant, and then (4) resisting arrest to the point of (5) a full-on BJJ/MMA/wrestling match with two police officers where you (6) seize the weapon of one of them and then (7) fire that weapon at the police officer, hitting him, and then (8) fleeing

    You said that none of that warrants arrest, that it's perfectly fine for said person to do all of that and then go home.
    By logical extension, especially considering #5 and #6 and #7, there are no crimes anymore. There is nothing that a person can do that would negate points #5, 6, and 7, so, hey, being arrested is voluntary according to you.
    :: face palm ::
    windwalker likes this.
  9. aikiMac

    aikiMac aikido + boxing = very good Moderator Supporter

    I believe the following would be proven true upon research:
    1) local police are ultimately governed by the City Council and the Mayor. Yes, there's a "Commissioner Gordon" or "Captain Gordon" immediately in charge, but he works for the City Council and Mayor.
    2) police policy, then, is ultimately set by the City politicians. Yes, the "Gordon" has input and influence, but if #1 is true then this point necessarily follows.
    3) if you pull up the top two or three dozen cities where police brutality is perceived as a problem, you will see that for the last couple of decades they have overwhelmingly been controlled by the Democrat Party.

    QED, police brutality ultimately rests upon the Democrat Party. (shrug) What else can we conclude if #3 proves true?

    That's not an accurate statement at all. In fact, it's false. In fact, you're being a racist just making that statement out loud.
    windwalker likes this.
  10. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    If anyone is actually interested in the legal position.

    We checked the law on resisting arrest in all 50 states, and found only one — North Dakota — whose statute explicitly states that there is a legal defense against conviction for resisting arrest on the basis that the arrest was “not lawful.” However, even in North Dakota the law stipulates that falsely believing the arrest was unlawful is not a defense. It also stipulates that an arrest is unlawful only if a police officer knowingly violates the law, as opposed to making a mistake in good faith.

    In 14 states (Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachussetts, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas) the law explicitly states that the legality of the arrest, or an individual’s beliefs about its legality, does not offer a defense against conviction for resisting arrest.

    In 15 states (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming) the law states that it is a criminal offense to resist, specifically, a “lawful” or “authorized” arrest.

    In those states, whether or not you are acting legally by resisting an unlawful arrest will depend on how the courts have interpreted the law, and in many cases there are still prohibitions on using physical force (especially disproportionate force) to resist even an unlawful arrest.

    In the remaining 20 states, the law prohibits resisting an arrest, without any reference to the legality or illegality of the arrest.

    In other words, in most of the United States there is absolutely no right to resist an unlawful arrest, and even in the minority of states where the law allows for the possibility of such a right, that right is limited. In practical terms, resisting an arrest — even one you believe to be unlawful — risks provoking a violent retaliation."

    Do U.S. Citizens Have the Right to Resist 'Unlawful Arrest'?
    Southpaw535, David Harrison and Grond like this.
  11. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    Correlation isn't causation, people who live in a high crime area, are often poor, poor people tend to vote democrats as they believe that is the best way to run an area.

    Another example is how low IQ is associated with voting republican. That doesn't mean every republican has a low IQ, it's just the overall trend.
    David Harrison likes this.
  12. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    David Harrison and Grond like this.
  13. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    Police brutality is the fault of the Democrats? Sorry, I don't follow and therefore don't buy your logic.

    Hold up a moment...I'm a racist? That's quite the bold statement for you to make. Please, enlighten me further. You might want to check your facts first: New York's largest police union chief has a racist, anti-Jewish coffee mug.
    Dead_pool likes this.
  14. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    You know, you can always smell a cowboy from a mile away.

    Dead_pool likes this.
  15. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Hey, Mac, maybe read someone's posts before trying to inform them of what they wrote?

    Grond and Dead_pool like this.
  16. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    It's literally a quote from trump that aired recently:
    See the video below:


    These people trust trump more then they trust their own rational thought, because republicans have given up rational thought, for feelings.

    "Just remember what you’re seeing and what you're reading is not what’s happening." -President Trump

    It's very Orwellian (1984): “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."
    David Harrison, Grond and ned like this.
  17. SaintDomingo

    SaintDomingo Valued Member

    Wow, a most disappointing response to, what I thought, a decent argument. I don’t post much on MAP but you’ve written ‘in fact’ twice in that statement, and then made a claim of Grond being racist, perhaps you should start backing that ‘fact’ up.
    David Harrison, Dead_pool and Grond like this.
  18. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    All I said was "Yet they are silent on the issue when the people being oppressed by militant governments are different looking from them." and I specifically meant all the people who show up to government buildings armed to the teeth, like in Michigan and Virginia recently, to protest what seem like common sense things (wearing a mask to prevent viral apocalypse). Armed lockdown protesters in Michigan statehouse

    But when all the poor people in the streets, and people exercising the First Amendment rights to protest government actions, who aren't armed with long rifles get beaten down by police. Where are all the Second Amendment fans then? At home, watching their favorite cable news talking heads, I presume. Cleaning their private arsenals.

    Anyways, I'm not here to cause trouble or get into partisan squabbles, I am just pointing out that things like this shooting are the norm, not the exception. We're talking about civil liberty here, something the country was supposed to be founded on, but is having a real hard time showing with all the anonymous federal military police running around states without permission. Sorry but I will take a little city riot now and then over that sort of fascist encroachment.

    I'll say one last political thing and then shut up. This county is founded on a weaker federal central government that yields to the states except in situations of national security. The situation of any major city is not a matter of national security or interest. Al Qaeda, ISIS, North Korea, Russia, are.
  19. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    After all that paranoia the right wing press kept spewing up about Obama and federal overreach, and now silence over federal agents in military combat gear, without insignia, in unmarked cars snatching people off the streets, all without the permission of the state. Has a state filed for a restraining order on the federal government before?
  20. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Remember when Obama was threatened with impeachment and the 2A nuts were speaking of a tyrannical fascist regime because Obama used an Executive Order to introduce health coverage for all Americans like a monster? And now Trump has issued how ever many he has in his first term and it's apparently not a problem at all?

    Fun times.

Share This Page