This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The 5th Amendment: Why A Law Professor Says "Don't Talk To Police"
Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
In my recent interview, “Serfdom is the New Normal” – Talkin’ Oligarch Blues with Perpetual Assets, I mentioned the dangers of talking to the police in light of the recent epidemic of shady civil asset forfeitures. What many people fail to realize, is that you aren’t obligated to have casual conversations with police when you have been pulled over. In fact, such conversations are often used solely to manufacture an excuse for further action against you. For example, take this excerpt from the recent Washington Post article, Highway Seizure in Iowa Fuels Debate about Asset-Forfeiture Laws:
Simmons said he was issuing a warning for the failure to signal. After handing over the paperwork, he said the stop was over. Then he asked the driver, Newmerzhycky, if he had “time for just a couple quick questions.”
Police who specialize in highway interdiction use casual conversations to avoid triggering legal questions about the length of stops. If the conversations are consensual, courts consider the added delay to be legal.
During a routine highway stop for a minor traffic violation, I can’t think of a good reason why it would ever be in your interest to continue chatting with a cop.
Highway police are trained to use the chats as an opportunity to take stock of alleged “indicators” of criminal activity, including nervous speech patterns, a pulsing carotid artery and inconsistencies in stories. They are also trained to seek permission for warrantless searches.
It’s really sad that it has come to this. It would be much better to live in a society where people could have enough trust in police to chat casually with them. The more police engage in bad behavior, the less the public will want to engage.
The trickier part about all of this, is that it isn’t clear what a reasonable length for a stop is. Here’s the Washington Post on the issue, from the article, Waiting for the Dogs During Police Traffic Stops:
Imagine a police officer pulls over a car for a routine traffic violation, such as speeding or driving with a broken taillight. During the stop, the officer develops a hunch that there may be drugs in the car. He contacts a local K-9 unit and requests a trained drug-sniffing dog; when the unit arrives, another officer will walk the dog around the car to see if it alerts to drugs inside. Although the Supreme Court has held that the use of the dog is not a search, the length of a warrantless stop must be reasonable. The officer can’t delay the driver forever.
This raises a question of Fourth Amendment law that has led to a lot of lower court litigation: If the officer has no reasonable suspicion that drugs are in the car — that is, he only has a hunch — how long can the traffic stop be delayed before the dog arrives and checks out the car?
Lower courts have generally answered the question by adopting a de minimis doctrine. Officers can extend the stop and wait for the dogs for ade minimis amount of time. But exactly how long is that?
Just yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held in United States v. Rodriguez that seven to eight minutes is de minimis. On the other hand, the Supreme Court of Nevada held a few months ago in State v. Beckman that nine minutes is too long.
With all that in mind, I strongly suggest watching the following video with almost 5 million views of Law Professor James Duane, simply titled: Don’t Talk to Police.
Disclaimer: I am not an attorney and obviously none of this should be taken as legal advice. It is meant to provide you with some information and you should do your own research (laws vary by state).
»
- 76803 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Am I free to go?
Hasta la vista, don't take any wooden steroids.
Statement - If Stopped or Questioned by Police or any Government Official
“Officer, I Assert My Fifth Amendment Rights As Stated On This Card”
Pursuant to the law, as established by the United States Supreme Court, my lawyer has advised me not to talk to anyone and not to answer questions about any pending criminal case or any other civil, administrative, judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory matter. Following his advice, I do not wish to talk to anyone about any criminal, civil, administrative, judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory matter, without my lawyer present. I waive no legal rights, nor give any consents, nor submit to any tests or other procedures, without my lawyer present. I ask that no one question or talk to me, without my lawyer here to advise me.
I do not wish to answer any questions. I want to see my lawyer.
Please call my lawyer immediately.
See: Miranda v. Arizona, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), Maness v. Myers, 419 U.S. 449 (1975), Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, (1951), Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973), Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972).
1951, 1966, 1972, 1973, 1975... yup... those were the good old days.
Anyway the cop said that you threatened him and reached for his gun before he shot you 6 times and his partner of course witnessed everything.
(Hint: Don't needlessly piss the cops off)
And that baggie of crack cocaine he pulls out of his pocket saying he saw it in plain view on your dashboard.
I don't answer questions: http://youtu.be/gwYBshAScmE
Pladizow is correct. Always answer with: "I don't answer questions."
Police: "Why don't you answer questions?"
Me: "I don't answer questions."
I always know why I am pulled over because I am always speeding. My bad.
Everyone should take a criminal procedure course. There is no such thing as "casual" when it comes to dealing with police in an official capacity. Never consent to a search (even if you honestly believe you are innocent and pure), even if it means you will be delayed or even miss a flight. And, if you are ever Mirandized, things have gotten serious and it is time to shut up until you have your attorney present.
Several years ago, I explained to my wife why she should never consent to a search. The hypothetical I provided is that she takes the neighbor kid to school because he missed the school bus, but unbeknownst to her, he had a marijuana joint in his back pocket and it fell out of his pocket into the crack between the cushions in the back seat. She gets stopped for speeding, but the officer offers to let her go without a ticket if she consents to a search of the vehicle. In the search, he finds the neighbor kid's joint. She is arrested and goes to jail for possession. (This is also known as "no good deed goes unpunished.")
Forward (over the cliff)!
Let's sprinkle some crack on him and get outta here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7F50Cd8LME
"And that baggie of crack cocaine he pulls out of his pocket saying he saw it in plain view on your dashboard."
So why the anger over Fergusson? If you think it, why shouldn't "they?" Oh, right.
Do you know why I pulled you over today sir ?
Because the bureaucrats that run the government like to use police as glorified heavily armed meter maids to extract additional revenues from the public at the point of a gun through bullshit fines, fees and regulations ?
That's a bit too truthy for them to handle.
Also dont' respond by saying:
"So you are telling me that you have NO idea why you pulled me over either?"
Everybodies got it wrong.
Don't use the 'Am I free to go, am I being detained rant' is going to push the cop into a ongoing saga fest.
And you cannot lie to a police officer that is a chargable offense
The best defense is being friendly and super vague, and super forgetful. Answer all questions asked with such vagery that it would leave them confused what you are doing by the end of the city block.
Let's say that you are going to Mom's house for turkey dinner or activity X,Y,Z. Your going to see your girlfriend and drink or activity X,Y,Z on the way your going to stop at McDonald's for a Milkshake.
He asks you where you are going..
'McDonalds for a milkshake.'
'Which one'
'Not sure, I might want to swing down by the mall and hit the one there, but then again I might want to swing over to staples to get some paper and I think there is one near the store, in that area. Oh wait I'm confused and forget. Do you know if there is a McDonald's by that staples.'
'So your not sure?'
'No But I definitely want to get a milkshake from McDonald's maybe I will save it for later.'
The only sure 'fact' of the entire conversation is that you are going to have a Milkshake from McDonalds. He cannot figure out where because you haven't decided yet, and you don't quite know where you might buy one. You have told the truth to the best of your knowledge but knowledge itself that doesn't know cannot be held to account of anything.
The "Am I free to go" and "am I being detained" response is the proper response for a non-border immigration check point.
Supreme Court has ruled they can stop and ask you if you are citizen or any other question, but at the same time ruled you do not have to answer them, BUT if you start ANY kind of conversation with a Border Patrol Agent then you have given your unspoken consent to being questioned. Simply saying "am I free to go" is all you are obligated under the law and their own operating rules to say. 2nd they can not detain or delay you in any way without prior probable cause for the detainment. Not speaking with them is not probable cause. If you comply with their order to pull over for detainment then you have given your unspoken consent to being detained. This is why people try to make them flat out say "Yes, I am detaining you"
This is in the Border Patrol's own hand book of regulations on how to operate those check points and has been specificly ruled on by the Supreme Court.
officer...what law are you trying to enforce?
Do you know why I pulled you over today sir ?
Sure I do, you haven't met your quota.
Q: Do you know why I pulled you over?
A: Because you didn't go to college?
"Because you need a hug?"
That's just asking for rape from the cop.
Do you know why I pulled you over ?
No officer, I thought you knew!
Buit it's really stupid to believe ALL police officers are militant, out to get you no matter what types.
And if you're really against police bothering you..
The next time you need help.. DON"T call 911!
And thank you for helping to save tax dollars for those who really need the help.
No matter how bad the situation is, calling the cops makes it worse. Always.
Because we need a place to employ veterans we keep creating through endless wars?
huh?
How many have actually been stopped at a Border Patrol checkpoint?
The first question is usually "Are you a US citizen?"
Is anyone suggesting that refusing to answer will not subject you to a stop
and a lengthy thorough search of your vehicle?
Is anyone suggesting that answering that is any 'consent' for detainment?
And is anyone suggesting most every Border Patrol stop is in a currently court-approved "Constitution-free" zone?
There is no "safe" way nowadays to deal with the militarized police. They are now tantamount to an occupation army. We are all 'Iraqis' or 'Afghans', subject to detainment and search on alleged suspicion, and being shot or tazed if the cop claims we scared him. The fake 'war on drugs' has also made it super easy to plant 'evidence'.
If I am in a "Constitution Free" zone when approaching one of their checkpoints, then they (as US Federal Agents) have no legal jurisdiction... All legal authorities not enumerated in the Consitution are reserved only for the Several States.
They can't enfoce a constitution free zone in total abandonment of the only document that underpins all their legal authority.
In other worlds, Mr and Mrs. Joe-Schmo American citizen: Your nation has been subjugated by criminals.
Simpy stopping at their stupid checkpoints is considered an act of consent.
They stage their cars at the checkpoints as if they intend to give chase if you blow right past them, but truth is that the chances are less than 2% that they actually will...
If one were to just blow through one of those checkpoints, the chances of those chickenshits opening fire on you with machineguns is around 99.9%.
If you attempt to drive through an immigration check point and fail to yeild, they will shred all four of your tires. They then will pull you out out the car at gun point. They can then charge you with a felony or let you go. Its up to them what happens to you.Now you have to pay for your car to be towed and four new tires, at the very least.
Overfed
the newly approved terminology is Warrior Cops
not "chickenshits"!
Sorry, my Newspeak is a little rusty. Thanks. ;-)
"There is no "safe" way nowadays to deal with the militarized police."
Unless you are a member of their gang.
"How many have actually been stopped...."
In SW Arizona is Yuma. It is not possible to leave Yuma in any direction without being stopped at a border patrol checkpoint. I have passed through these a few times and the agents that stop every vehicle have a variety of questions. There are always people pulled into the secondary inspection, pulled out of their private vehicle and several agents searching through all the personal and private items. This is tyrany in action and happens every minute of every day.
STACKERS
Cite please.....?
"Would you just pull over into secondary for me..."
"No thanks," "I want to be free to go on my way"
Got to be careful, once you act dumb and forgetful, they get the "he's on drugs" track and it doesn't work out well. You have to be mentally fit to drive, if you suggest otherwise you open up a lot of ways for them to Fuck you over further.
"The best defense is being friendly and super vague, and super forgetful"
in other words, appear "stoned"??
That or carry a bag of donuts with you at all times
I flash my PBA card and if it's expired, I show them my Dunkin Donuts loyalty card.
Um. No. Your perfectly alert, cognizant and capable of a lucid and clear conversation.
It's just that the information you are sharing is constantly compartmentalized and minimized to be of little distractionary use. You told the truth but only a small fraction of it. He doesn't need to know your going to your moms, or your girlfriends, or you might drink later.
He just needs some useless distractionary information that burns up his time so he goes away and looks for real criminals.
Like in the milkshake scenario it can be continued further...
'Do you think those milkshakes are fattening?' or 'Do you think McDonalds food is even safe to eat?'
- Now the conversation is twisting into
A. Does McDonald's serve fattening food or fit food?
B. I'm a cop and I eat there too much maybe I am getting fat (he says subconsiously to himself)
C. should society be eating these foods at all.
While you simultaneously appeard to not have a clue where you are going you have simultaneously asked a bunch of questions with philisophical underpinnings.
The cop will think you're an idiot. It's important that he do so. Because A. where you are going and what you are doing is your own private business.
B. The cop has been drowned in useless thoughts and side distractions of a cultural and societal quesiton and nature.
C. He has satisfied his own psychological desire to question you, and you have answered the questions truthfully whilst simultaneously steering the conversation into a dumb meaningless debate.
D. Finally twist the conversation even more into all kinds of 'curious george subjects'
'Do people around here speed alot?'
wut?
Exactly, baffle them with bullshit and move along to do something more meaningful with your time.
How about, "I'm probably going to stop at McDonalds or Burger King but not sure which one. Which do you think is better?" Regardless of how they answer, then ask some additional questions such as, "should I get the double cheeseburger or Big Mac? With fries or onion rings? Should I get a milkshake or go for a soda?" Then when he begins getting very hungry and wants to get some food for himself, you nail it. "Should I ask for extra pickles on my burger?"
Rather than give you a ticket, he will probably ask to join you for lunch.
As a Canadian I amended the above to suit our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Have multiple copies and have handed them out to many people. And yes it is unfortunate it has come down to this.
Please post a link!
Wee-weed up. Don't read that card to the officer (or hand it to him to read). It takes time to read all that and that works to the cops advantage.
When you read he can hear your voice (slurring, nervous etc)
When he then asks to read it himself he will take it and read it really, really sloooow. That is the 5 minutes he wanted to delay you until the K9 unit, or his buddy with the drop bag of weed arrives.
Just be polite, ask if you are free to go and let him say "Yes". Then go.
Agreed... there are a few very bad LEOs out there...
And if they really feel like screwing you, they will find a way.
Sadly, in those cases, there's not a whole lot you can do about it.
And the dirty bastard LEO knows it. He's usually on an ego-power trip.
Basically, you have 2 choices...
You can be polite as shit and kiss his ass in every way possible...
Or you can be belligerent, which is what he wants.
Please don't give Barney Fife the pleasure/orgasm he seeks.
In those cases you have to swallow your pride...
Hope for as many honest witnesses as possible...
And just try to record everything in your memory that you can.
Just keep in mind that you can be arrested and booked for minor offences. The process can take hours.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=93495
“Officer, I Assert My Fifth Amendment Rights As Stated On This Card”
Pursuant to the law, as established by the United States Supreme Court, my lawyer has advised me not to talk to anyone and not to answer questions about any pending criminal case or any other civil, administrative, judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory matter. Following his advice, I do not wish to talk to anyone about any criminal, civil, administrative, judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory matter, without my lawyer present. I waive no legal rights, nor give any consents, nor submit to any tests or other procedures, without my lawyer present. I ask that no one question or talk to me, without my lawyer here to advise me.
I do not wish to answer any questions. I want to see my lawyer.
Please call my lawyer immediately.
You reached into your pocket for the card.... bang, bang, bang, bang. You are now dead.
I love these elf help videos. Thanks Tyler !
And if you happen to be a policeman don't talk to yourself either
Gestapo?
Only words to be spoken, yes sir, no sir, am I being detained.
That's it
"Smile for the camera" might allso be helpful.
There was a 60% reduction in police 'use of force' and 88% reduction in citizen complaints when cops were required to wear body cameras. The cops say that the citizen complaints fell because officers now had the 'goods' on the citizens... but when has a court of law not sided with the police account?
http://online.wsj.com/articles/what-happens-when-police-officers-wear-bo...
Anyway the police unions are largely against forcing their officers to wear cameras. They say it's an invasion of their privacy...
Bullshit it's an invasion of their privacy!! They are not acting as private citizens when they wear that blue costume and metal badge. They are conducting themselves as government workers enforcing laws and for too long breaking these same laws they were supposed to uphold.
They call them "perqs"...
The main thing is that we behave as adversarial as possible, because after all, this is what those driving us off the cliff desire. Lets be sure to always see the cops as the enemy, and make damned sure they see us as the same. Unfortunately after living 61 years and NEVER having been abused by the police, I can only assume it is me that is crazy.
Don't get me wrong. We do have a problem with growing institutional power. Its not just the police, its Child Protective Services, Its code enforcement, it taxing agencies...all of them are getting way too powerful. But the answer is not confrontation on the side of the road. When we confront the lowest level of this corruption of power, we are only reinforcing the perceptions their leaders are pumping into their heads.
You're under estimating the seriousness of the problem. A new study showed that if CPS has to go do an in home visit, they will take the child away from the family 80% of the time. EIGHTY F'ING PERCENT !! The state is out of control.
Zero said:
"Anyway the police unions are largely against forcing their officers to wear cameras. They say it's an invasion of their privacy..."
Seems anything a public servant does is public record.
WATCH THE VIDEO ! It is not only entertaining but wicked informative. Watch through to the end and you'll see truly how even if you're perfectly innocent and have an alibi STILL don't talk to the police.
Haven't watched it all yet, but this is something I have been aware of since my run ins with LE as a yoot.
They absolutely HATED me for knowing my rights.
I like how he proves that talking is actually even worse if you happen to be innocent.
Every minute is absolute gold! Watch and pass it along.
Superman, aka my step-brother, got shot in a shithole bar in a podunck desert town. The rest of our family was touring Europe. My task was to feed and maintain the livestock on dad's property. Wife and I are coming back and have to swing by our house before making another sixty mile trip to the hospital.
Cop pulled me over at Dead Man's Point.
Came up and I handed license and registration...and continued talking to wife about the situation with my brother. Totally igonored the cop. He handed me my shit back and a ticket. Fine came in the mail for around $400 for driving in excess of 90 mph.
Went to court. I was driving around 70. I sit through the initial rounds of 'you're going to jail for 'x''...
Judge looks up...'Kevin, what are you here for?'
'Got a ticket.'
'What for?'
'Speeding.'
'And?'
'It says I was doing over 90.'
'Were you speeding?'
'Oh, yeah, I was doing about 70 no way I was doing over that.'
'Ok, $75 fine, pay at the window.'
The judge knowing you has benefits, too.
Guilty of speeding by ten miles an hour on an open desert road in broad daylight. Yes, I was. But having a 'reputation' with the court saved me $325.
As to Superman...shot in the chest with a .45 from six inches away...he's still going strong.
And don't talk to the FBI. https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jgDsbjAYXcQ
Or government investigators. http://constitutionalism.blogspot.com/2005/02/talk-to-federal-investigat...
The police, prosecutors and judges are our justice industrial complex to be avoided. Don't expect the media to help out as they deliberately want to protect themselves in any court actions.
Yeah, that form 302 bullshit is just that, bullshit. But the cocksuckers will threaten to raid your house if they really want to talk to you. They'll probably want to meet in one of their offices too, where they can control if you record or not. If they ever call you wanting an interview, make sure you record the conversation and insist that the interview not be in one of their offices if you cannot afford an attorney.
El Vaquero: The most powerful word is NO. No competent attorney would allow the interview, while the incompetent would trust the police. The words of Associate Supreme Court Judge, Jackson, who was Chief Judge at Nuremberg trials, is "any lawyer worth his salt will tell the suspect in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances."
Then they twist things or make some shit up, present it to the magistrate and WHAMMO! FBI SWAT is kicking in your door with M4s against their shoulders.
fight the power
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdeo7Q2E5cE
I'm still amazed that little "Pip~Sqeak" Darren Furguson was EVER given a gun and badge. He's endemic of how individuals are completely incapable of making decisions for themselves, and are taught that the system will protect them as they're being scapegoated and thrown under the bus.
Any seasoned cop worth his salt, would have tazed that fat bastard and cuffed him. Don't get me wrong, he tossed the dice and crapped out.
Wilson did not have a taser. Thus your post craps out.
Wilson being the mindless retard that you are, opted NOT to carry a tazer. You IDIOT!
Officer Darren Wilson didn't carry a Taser because they aren't 'comfortable'
Do your homework before you bloviate. You might get someone killed JUNIOR!
FWIW the kid played with fire, and ended up getting burnt.
Yen Cross Wilson being the mindless retard that you are, opted NOT to carry a tazer. You IDIOT!
Officer Darren Wilson didn't carry a Taser because they aren't 'comfortable'
Do your homework before you bloviate. You might get someone killed JUNIOR!
FWIW the kid played with fire, and ended up getting burnt.
---
I simply stated a fact. I didn't insult you, but however, you took yourself to a lower level by going into insults. That makes YOU the retard and the idiot.
And the fact that you didn't know that Wilson didn't have a taser on him shows YOU didn't do your homework.
And by the way, many police offer ARs and shotguns and other various weapons. But most police do not carry them on them because they are cumbersome for most routine duties.
Go home little boy. Kicking your ass is boring!
You shouldn't have opened you mouth in the first place... You did insult me.
You made a statement that was " factually incorrect", and then tried to justify it by using my own words.
WTF does carrying long guns and other lethal weapons have to do with carrying a NON lethal weapon you one size fits all IDIOT?
The topic of my discussion was about a person making a consious decision to NOT carry a NON lethal weapon. Obfuscate much much JUNIOR? Give us a call when you've collected another decade or so under your belt. F/U
Yes, yes don't ever use a liberals words or actions against them it is highly irritating and insulting to make them live up to their own utterances..
The real idiots are the people who've donated $242,000.00 to this bitch's Ferguson cake shop...
http://www.gofundme.com/NataliesCakesnMore
Great comments from both of you gentlemen. I'm still perplexed as to why the Officer didn't carry a tazer. Based on his BIO he's 6' 3" and 200 lbs plus.
His statements make it sound like Wilson was tossing him around like a "rag doll". It just doesn't add up.
Perhaps he should have had a long gun in the car. It wouldn't have taken him 12-13 tries to lobotomize the kid.
Please, detail your experience in life and death fights. I hit a guy with a hydraulic jack handle across the side of his face and then nailed the arm he had the knife in. He turned and I hit him across the lower back as hard as I could and he ran off. Next day he presented at the hospital bleeding from a kidney but he never went down and never dropped the k-bar..
You shoot until the threat ends.
I once had a fully loaded nickel plated 357 magnum pointed at me while I was jacuzzing. A few rounds were fired.
Luckily, no one was hurt. Crazy drunk Mexicans.
I also pounded the shit out of a couple of Indians that were messing with myself and a few friends.
I've got lot's of stories.
It's likely the 298 lb 'gentle giant' would have jammed the tazer up Wilson's ass.
All I know is that I wouldn't be affraid of a 300 pound 'JELLY DONUT'. He should have offered him some egg roles and cuffed him while he was inhaling them.
comment popped up in wrong place.... moved
IF SHE IS SMART, SHE AND FAMILY WILL BUY A ONE WAY BUS TICKET OUT OF THE DINGLE.
Justify your vile and ugly comment. Why do you call her "bitch"? Why do you hate her?? It sounds like she worked hard to start a bakery business, only to have it destroyed by thugs. I applaud those who donated to help her out.
kinskian was just confessing what is in his heart. Freely.
It sounds like it. Blind hate. Jealousy for what others have worked hard to achieve. Envy for the character of good people. And a deep disgust with themselves.
Classic anarchist.
Why aren't negro police riding herd on Ferguson, anyway? Surely there are enough authoritarian bullies of low-average iq in the negro community to fill the bill.
Can you imagine the quality of the white cops there if the Ferguson PD is the best job they could get?
A real cop would have used a .45.
44 MAG to the arm would have stopped Brown's stampede. 1000 ft/lbs of force from a 44 MAG to the arm would have spun him around. left Brown injured and alive to stand trial. 9mm are pea shooting varmit guns.
A 44 mag would have gone through the arm and hit a bystander and the person standing behind the bystander. That also assumes that a cop doesn't miss the arm in the first place. Cops are not good shots and have a difficult enough time aiming for centre of mass. You think they are Annie Oakley and can wing somebody?
go watch some more hollywood movies.
.
Wow, that is just retarded YC...
Should have called for back up.
Here's the bottomline...If you attack a cop in his patrol car and reach for his gun...it's game on.
Watch the video above and read this:
http://famguardian.org/disks/SurvivalDVD/arrest%20proof%20yourself.pdf
Downloaded this in 2010.
Made sure my teenage kids watched it TWICE.
me too 2011
almost 300 pages to learn how to arrets proof yourself. That says it all
Get revenge at a.later date.
Thats how you handle civil forfeiture.
"Get revenge at a.later date."
They should not be permitted to live comfortably amongst their victims.
An American, not US subject.
Cop takes 3k from you
Attorney retainer 5k to get back your 3.
That's the racket.
"That's the racket."
Yes, but it starts with the gun and badge thugs' treason.
An American, not US subject.
Article 3, Section 3:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
I'm Witness One
They gotta sleep somewhere....
I was waiting for someone to say that. Nice job, Buster.
These dirtbag pigs wouldn't feel so confident about acting with impunity if they started receiving pictures of their kids playing at school, their wives shopping, or what have you. Or if someone torched their houses while they slept. We're getting there little by little. People can only take so much before they start hitting back.
When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government fears the people there is liberty.
The assumption of this article is that all cops are bad. May I suggest something? Try taking a citizens Police Academy course in your own town and go out on Patrol on an evening during the full moon. I guarantee that you will have a better appreciation of what Police have to go through for their job. It will also give you some insight into their ethics and thought process.
I was so impressed with the Police in Danville, Ca. and realized that there may be a concerted effort to demonize the Police because the reality was the opposite. There was no hint of impropriety at all, I just saw Police men and Police Women trying to protect its citizens, and I saw a Police chief who gave us his private email to report any issues. They have a heightened awareness of ethics, more so than most citizens.
Another suggestion, always start with a good attitude when stopped. Makes a big difference.
All cops aren't bad, and all cops aren't good. If there is a complaint about unfairness, feel free to write/call/email the Chief of Police or higher. Many people feel helpless and nothing gets changed. You have more power and control than you realize.
Are you willing to bet everything you have, up to and including your life, that you're talking to one of the good ones?
The summary is that there is no upside to the innocent citizen for anything other than being polite and quiet. And there is a huge downside risk for saying anything.
Let's talk the highway robbery they call "asset forfeiture" and see how far you get with complaints to the Chief.
While all cops aren't bad the system gives them incentives to ticket, search and arrest as much as they can.
Of course be polite but don't chat, don't offer any info, refuse searches, stay low and out of their IT systems and THE system.
"The assumption of this article is that all cops are bad."
If the institution, policing, is corrupt and criminal, then by moral and legal necessity, a "good" cop would resign. His oath requires it. His humanity requires it. Article 3, Section 3 demands it. Nuremberg Principle IV prevents refutation of it.
An American, not US subject.
Is every single police unit in every single city, state and county corrupt? I should hope not. So it isn't the institution called police that is corrupt but individual county police or individual departments.
So a good cop can in good consience remain with the Mayberry PD. With the Chitcago police or many others then he has to consider if he can reform the corruption by remaining in the system (hard), inform Internal Affairs (yeah right) or resign (the easy option).
Be polite to every cop, the good ones deserve it and the bad one will have less reason to ruin your day.
Is a Mayberry PD cop obliged to help imprison people for ingesting the wrong kind of plant? Will he assist in confiscations of private property to pay off unconstitutional IRS demands?
To be a cop in the present system is to be a moral automaton. Thoreau said something rather pithy about that.
Corruption is a requirement. It is forced on every cop by the politicians and bureaucrats who run the system. Good cops quit or are fired; bad cops remain.
Basia...no one is saying all cops are bad or that the job is not dangerous (although more doctors have been shot in Las Vegas in the last 10 years than police).
Check out the video of the Vegas cop kicking the guy with the diabetic coma in the head while the cop shouts 'are you done resisting arrest yet'...classy...
Cuz the dirty cops are going to be showing Joe Sixpack how they do during the citizens Police Academy course.
Dude, riddle me these: Why is there no frequency of good officers bringing public accusation against bad/abusive ones? Why does the police union resist officers wearing body cameras? Why is there so much documentation, so much history, of police malfeasance?
Many good cops leave the cesspit police departments and move to small towns. There are thousands of flyover places with honest police who are commited to serving their neighbours.
I'm sure there are also thousands of other towns with corrupt cops etc. Just move to where there are good cops as those are the places where chaos will be least likely when TSHTF as those cops will be allies against the outside shit.
Fucking Danville California?!... lol
The bulk of police work involves arresting people for drugs or finding ways to raise money by ticketing people for driving violations, neither of which protects anybody from anything. Statistical analysis shows that raising money is more important than putting violent or otherwise dangerous people behind bars. Any cop who doesn't raise enough money will be terminated from the force.
If you would have watched the video, you would realize that even if a police is not interested in you as a suspect even if they are honest you can still find yourself in a lot of legal trouble. If the police are mistaken, remembered something incorectly, angry or had a bad day then you can go to prison. Its not their inherent badness or goodness, its that you are potentially entering evidence into a case in an uncontrolled way.
ALL cops ARE bad. Every single one of them violates the rights of individual human beings on a daily basis.
It is impossible to be a cop and not be a criminal. At the very least they are silent as their fellows engage in theft, kidnapping, and assault, and occasionally murder.
The only thing a "good" cop can do is turn in his badge and find productive work in the private sector, and perhaps speak out about the criminal nature of the system he was once a part of.
all cops are bad because they refuse to do something about bad cops which says the "good" cops allow it to happen all the way to the chief.
Cops are allowed to lie to you.
It's illegal to lie to cops.
It's a no-win situation, so avoid it.
Practice lying with a straight face.
If you're not married I suggest you try it out.
Good practice for when you find yourself talking to a cop.
"No Honey, I don't know what you saw but I would never chainsaw in flip flops and shorts,..."
While I appreciate the article and info, it is a bit ridiculous to assume, hope, that the gun and badge thugs are going to respect some of one's rights while violating others.
We, the American people, don't need to change our behavior, the gun and badge thugs, and their respective governments, need to change theirs--from treason to justice.
Additionally, if one considers that all gun and badge activities are, as all governmnet actions are, for money and power, they are not going to stop, say "awe shucks," and go away. No they are going to up their treason, and hurt and kill more for the all mighty lucre, power, and thrill.
An American, not US subject.
In addition to the Four Rs, the American people should be compiling a list, call it the Crimes Against the American People List (CAAPL)?? A list of known pol, crat, functionaries (funcs) and bankster criminals in their sphere of influence.
Oath violating and treasonous gun and badge thugs, corrupt pols and crats, thieving banksters, etc. should be placed on one's list. Their names, crimes, and positions should be, at a minimum, kept for future reference for accountability, trial and punishment.
When the DC US finally collapses, these lists can then be used to root out the known criminals that will think that they can hide amongst their victims--no "Truth and Reconciliation," no quarter, only "Trial and Retribution."
Only dirty traitorous satanic scumbag members of the bar would claim you have to invoke (cast your spell) rights that already exist and are in effect without invoking them
And in their moronic levels of stupidity they now have forced a situation to where the ignorant masses are who were never aware of their rights are forced to learn them frequently through the example of others. And the snowball starts rolling as more realize their power and stand up against this very criminal enterprise that enslaves the planet
If they had an ounce of brains they'd realize that almost nobody knows their rights or had any interest in learning them. If they left them in effect without people having to learn them they quite likely would have vanished completely and almost nobody would even realize it
Thank the creator as it is becoming more apparent over time that if we are not able to free ourselves satan's minions quite likely may be the cause of their own destruction. This is a fraction of one example of why the globalists will fail and we will prevail. If not in our lifetime then the next
Negative. The Gestapo have had court rulings upholding the notion that ONLY an active invocation of Miranda Rights entitle an indivdual to the right to remain silent. The system is verkakte. I agree with your point, one should NOT have to actively assert their Consitutional rights. Sign of the times. Buy another gun, recruit another teammate, train another hour.
Details linked below, SCOTUS 5-4 ruling, Salinas vs Texas
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/06/robert-farago/supreme-court-you...
Where did my comment?
NSA blocked?
hehe.
A song to Latin Lover, COSMOS, Kirk and others and others.
A song for the good:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_P03IJ2ADo
:-)
Just raise your hands very slowly above your head and say yes sir or no sir to every question... and hope. WTF!
That's not how we live here!
There is a Russian saying:
The more you lower the head, the more it shows the ass!
hehe.
"If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They'll have enough to eat, a bed and roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human Being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government." - General Dwight David Eisenhower
"General Dwight David Eisenhower"
Wasn't he in on the murder of General Patton? along with the genocide of a few million German POA's just after the war...that General Dwight David Eisenhower? Ironical.
Briefly said Brazilian police never act alone.
In blitz, are five or six vehicles, stop whom they consider suspicious, act decently.
There are logistics involved, do blitz where the guy can not return the vehicle and get away.
Confer the documentation of the vehicle and the driver if something suspicious, request opening the trunk to see if there is an exchange of tire, tools etc. .
In the latter case ask the escort out of the vehicle to check the validity of the fire extinguisher.
Said and done comparisons between Public Safety preventive and coercive.
hehe.
Have blitz saw 25 police, always in pairs when checking the documentation of a vehicle required to stop.
Are never alone.
When in motorcycle, never requested open the box there.
The guys have insight and good aim.
On a trip back to Goiás, watched with my eyes two cars with two guys face 15 armored car robbers.
One of the assailants were on the armored car shooting with AR-15.
The police hit the guy with a .40 pistol Taurus - standard weapons in the car with two men, waist gun.
SUV's with five men take lime. 12 and AR-15.
Individualism rooted in American culture prevents the Public Security work in teams.
: - /
I have already forced my kids to watch this video. They know better now. It really is too bad but understanding reality is far better than just being pissed at the fact that reality isn't the way you think it should be. The police are not your friend. I would never invite the police into my house. If there is a burglary it will almost certainly go unreported. The last cop I let in went through the house (to make certain it was safe) and found fire crackers in the garage. Even though they had the license plate number of the perp they failed to arrest anyone (or return any property). I was 'let off with a warning' about the fire cracker. Never again.
You must not have had any good loot!
Step-Dad and Mom went off on retirement trip. Burglers kicked down the front door. On discovery we called the cops. On the floor of the front room was bent gun case. The gun safe had been drug out of the house and taken.
Cops in the house and that bent gun case and the Stradivarius were next to each other. Cops asked me toopen the case. I hadn't touched it to that point and expected that the locks held well enough to prevent the burglers from opening it.
Nope, it flipped open easily...and in plain sight was an AR-18 with a folding stock, four mags, and a few extra firing pins.
Cops: "Please safeguard this property."
Other guns were recovered, but to date, three years later, Step-Dad has yet to get them back.
Sidenote: Shotgun was used to kill a child molester by one of the customers of the burglers. If it ever is returned we've planned a notching ceremony.
They rally round tha family! With a pocket full of shells....
Rule of Thumb.
Throw your ID at the cop and shut up.
If they have a reason to arrest you they are going to no matter what you say, so shut up.
Better to be quiet and let them ruin your evening and sue them later for your wasted time and expenses than to endup in a long drawn out case based on hearsay and bullshit.
I had a casual conversation with a cop after a traffic accident in which my car was disabled. Good thing I did, he drove me the remaining 10 miles to work.
Also if you get a ticket, make them place it on your dashboard. Don't even take it from them. My sister got arrested for snatching the ticket from a cop. Accused her of battery. No shit.
Just STFU
Far too many of these cops and DAs are waaaay out of control.
So did Conan restore the daughter of King Ausdread...
Where was the law when my father was forced to do crimes by the italian mafia, for the jewish usurers, on a community that no longer exists, against his own people, because of YOU?
Your days are numbered. Fuckers. I AM WAR
Remember Vietnam, the Phoenix project. That was yesterday for me. The CIA business in Ulster was the follow up. Look. I was there.
I have one fellow veteran friend left. A Vietnam vet. She has had no health care for a year because of Obamacare, and she's old and needs it. When she dies, you're mine. Obama: You treated this angel like that? Die.
I am a soldier. Bitch.
I am not OK.
It was King Osric to whom Conan restored the wayward daughter, and that was only in the movie with Arnold.
Let's settle this once and for all. The kid ripped off a small store and broke several laws.
The kid was eventually confronted by an officer that was ill equiped mentally, physically, and socially.
The officer alllows suspect to approach his vehicle. (TAZER?) The officer then has no chice but to protect his firearm.
The suspect runs/walks away and the officer gives chase, while calling for back-up.
The officer didn't have a rifle "long gun". At this point the officer knows he's got "eyes" coming and should have held back.
The officer instead decides he's been punched in the face a few times, and is going to pursue the villain.
Being the conservative person I am, I'd have waited for backup, and kicked the little fuck in the head a few times before he was loaded into the cruiser. No riots/ SSDD. Bitchez Can you hear me now sessinpo? sessinpussy?
No, you would NOT have waited. You would have shot Brown. So would I. NO ONE should have to take getting punched in the face, and Brown had it coming.
End of story.
Actually, police are EXACTLY the kind of people who have to "take" a punch to the face.
You and I don't.
Police do, their goal is to "protect and serve" others, not themselves.
If a cop goes straight to his gun beause of what looks like a relatively routine (for law enforcement) altercation he's bad at his job. They should be trained to handle these circumstances better.
WRONG. NO ONE HAS TO TAKE PUNCHES TO THE FACE. That notion is UTTER BULLSHIT.
And it's clear to me from your remarks you have NEVER been in a fight for your life. Don't second guess guys that have to do the bloody work. I've been there, adn I can tell you that your desire to survive is a helluva motivator.
sorry, buddy, I agree with some of your posts, but if your answer to a punch in the face is to take out a gun and end someone's life, you are mentally disturbed.
Ever hear of 'an eye for an eye'? Killing someone (even shooting that just maims, not kills) is DISPROPORTIONATE response to the initial assault.
but I'm curious now - what other slights do you consider justify killing someone? Stealing your lunch money? Zooming into a parking spot before you? Playing their music too loudly on the bus?
Now that's just stupid. If you are assualted, do you think the guy will stop just because you don't like it? Once a man attacks me, it's solely up to my judgement as to what I feel I need to use to defend myself. If that involves the attackers death, that's on him.
When someone intrudes on your rights with violence, how does he still have any right to your mercy or moderation?
What you said is utter bullshit.
When children fight there may be some rules, but when grown-ups do it, especially when there is a weapon available (the officers pistol), that's a life and death situation to me. [It would be enlightening to know the number of people killed with their own weapon.] If I think some guy is trying to cause me serious harm, I would use my weapon, no question. That's what they're for.