Prepper Forum / Survivalist Forum banner
1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,563 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just found this video, got it off Survivalblog.com. Well worth the 7+minutes to watch. Jessie the Outlaw - Message to Police.

YouTube
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,207 Posts
Meangreen
Go to bed and sleep it off. Nobody appreciates brute force over instructive reasoning, oooo except for the cops at your door, sorry my bad.

I found the message both inspirational and instructive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,068 Posts
Has anybody done a "study" to find out how many cops have gotten themselves transferred, left the force or taken a lower position to avoid having to be involved in the situation described in the video? We ABSOLUTELY cannot have individual officers deciding which laws they are going to enforce and which ones they are not!!!!

As a Conservative, I like law and order. I want consistent, predictable and understandable rules that I have to follow to get through my life successfully. Hell, that is my biggest complaint about Obama is that he neither consistent nor predictable! What I absolutely DO NOT want is individual officers or individual politicians deciding which laws are good and which laws are bad and choosing not to enforce the bad laws. National heath care anybody?

The officers that refuse to uphold unconstitutional laws and walk away are heros. There is no question about that. But ultimately we cannot blame the officers that uphold even the unconstitutional laws for doing what we pay them to do. The only people we can blame for unconstitutional laws are the voters that allowed this to happen. If you do not like what the cops are doing, then elect politicians that will retask them to do what you do want.

Sorry, but this is a topic that gets under my skin.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,563 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Sounds like some here think the Founding Fathers may have gotten it wrong, they should have voted more, all hail the King.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,068 Posts
Sounds like some here think the Founding Fathers may have gotten it wrong, they should have voted more, all hail the King.
Please elaborate. I do not understand your point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,417 Posts
What people don't know or don't care to know is that federal agencies are given illegal orders that we refuse to follow. Obama's executive orders are perfect examples, the order is given, we refuse to follow them, the legal department drafts a rebuttal based on the unconstitutionality of the order, and it null and void.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,068 Posts
If each LEO follows his own interpretation of law, you end up with a completely subjective system - in other words Chicago. That is unacceptable. For a simple example, consider speed limits. I drive I-35 through Iowa on a fairly regular basis. It is flat and straight and there is no reason for a 65 MPH speed limit. But that is what it is. Do I follow that law? Of course not. I regularly drive it at between at between 80 and 85. But when I get pulled over, I also do not blame the cop. 65 is the law. I knowingly am breaking the law. Okay, accept the ticket and kick 'er down to 90 to make up the lost time for getting puled over.

My point is we need consistency with law enforcement. The video seemed to me to imply that officers selectively applying the laws they believed in, was the best way to go. And to that I say absolutely NOT!!!!

But she did have a great chest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,563 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Please elaborate. I do not understand your point.
As per your post, you don't want cops that can tell right from wrong, they should follow orders and carry out the law regardless, that's what they are paid to do. If the Founding Fathers didn't like their politicians they should have just voted them out of office, not fight back, right. We didn't vote them out of office so we pay the price and hope for the best, is that what your saying?

The video didn't say all cops, but you don't hear a lot of cops speaking out against these laws that trample the constitution, but there are some and they usually get shut down fast. Guess I'm in the minority on this post, so be it, I still agree with what she said. There may come a time when all will have to choose where they stand. If that doesn't get the point across then we will agree to dis agree on the video.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
Interesting Video don't think she was saying anything more then police officers need to look inside themselves and make sure they a police officer for the right reasons and not to follow their bosses orders blindly..There are always going to be excellent,good,average, and bad police officers like any other profession..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,693 Posts
I'm sorry MeanGreen that this subject hit a nerve for you, but I see a lot of truth in this video. Oppression by LEO's is becoming more and more prevalent in this country. The correlation between our LEO's and the Nazi enforcers "just following orders" also rings very true. All human beings, including LEO's, have a moral obligation to distinguish between right and wrong, regardless of what orders they have received. Is it ok for a TSA agent to strip search a 9 year old girl at the airport, just because they are following orders in the name of "security"? No, it is wrong, and in that situation, I would disobey my orders, or quit on the spot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,068 Posts
As per your post, you don't want cops that can tell right from wrong, they should follow orders and carry out the law regardless, that's what they are paid to do. If the Founding Fathers didn't like their politicians they should have just voted them out of office, not fight back, right. We didn't vote them out of office so we pay the price and hope for the best, is that what your saying?

The video didn't say all cops, but you don't hear a lot of cops speaking out against these laws that trample the constitution, but there are some and they usually get shut down fast. Guess I'm in the minority on this post, so be it, I still agree with what she said. There may come a time when all will have to choose where they stand. If that doesn't get the point across then we will agree to dis agree on the video.
If I did not explain myself well enough, I apologize. I did not mean to imply that cops should follow orders blindly. But, they do need to enforce the laws whether they agree with them or not. In the video, the gal uses the marijuana as an example. She seems to think that police should just turn a blind eye when they see somebody using it or possessing it. My point is, regardless of whether you think pot should be legal or not (personally I do not care either way), the police cannot just arbitrarily decide they do not want to enforce the laws against it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
21,290 Posts
Take a look at this video I think it applies to many aspects of what this thread is all about. It is a catchy song that you'll be singing in your head all day. Corey Smith is a singer songwriter that obviously says the F-Word multiple times in this song so use some headphones or keep the children away. My point is that it addresses the 1st and 4th Amendments in a round a bout way. Let me know what y'all think about it. Not the perfect country and western song like David Allen Coe but still talks about gettin' drunk, jail, etc. Enjoy but think about in regards to your rights.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,641 Posts
My biggest problem is that some want to lump everyone into 1 big pile. Either all are good or all are bad. The truth is somewhere in the middle. People are people.

That being said, selective enforcement has been going in Chicago for many years. That works well for them,right? Wouldn't you just love to live there?????? Me, I think I'll pass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,123 Posts
Cops are people too. They have ambitions, goals, families, hobbies, etc. They put their pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us. There are smart ones, and dumb ones. Moral ones and immoral ones. Good ones and bad ones.

I know a lot of cops and they are all good folk with no tolerance for the crap that brings a community down. They are strong leaders in their community. Having said that, I think we have all heard about that "one guy on the force" that did something stupid like pulling attractive females over for traffic violations just so he could get them to show him their tits and let them go - or some other dumb-shit stunt. These are the 1% of the 1% and they get weeded out pretty quick.

The biggest risk anyone has is some rookie that is shy on experience and knowledge of the law. Example: I know a guy that got pulled over because his third brake light was out. In AZ, your car is required to be manufactured with a 3rd brake light but you are not required to maintain it. If the bulb goes out, oh well - it isn't a traffic violation. Rookie officer also discovered that he was open carrying a pistol so she took the pistol (perfectly within her rights) and then cuffed and mirandized him before stuffing him in a patrol car because he was within 1000 feet of a school where she pulled him over (at 10PM in the summer). The guy protested because he was a CCW licensed citizen (allowed to carry within 1000) and because the 3rdBL was not a moving violation. So he requested a supervisor who showed up and cleared him of all wrong doing and returned his pistol to him (completely disassembled in a baggie - ammo in a separate baggie). The officer thought she was doing her job but she was a rookie and just didn't have the experience needed to do the great job that she really wanted to do in her heart. With a little instruction and a few years experience, she'll probably make an outstanding officer.

So I'm not worried about American Police Officers converting into some sort of Brown Shirt organization that goes around jack-booting civilians in the neck over petty shit. Know your rights and the law. Keep a lawyers number in your cell (vet them first) and if you cant reason your way out of a situation like the guy with the 3rd brake light did, then go along nice and easy until you can call a lawyer to get it straight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,563 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
If I did not explain myself well enough, I apologize. I did not mean to imply that cops should follow orders blindly. But, they do need to enforce the laws whether they agree with them or not. In the video, the gal uses the marijuana as an example. She seems to think that police should just turn a blind eye when they see somebody using it or possessing it. My point is, regardless of whether you think pot should be legal or not (personally I do not care either way), the police cannot just arbitrarily decide they do not want to enforce the laws against it.
As I said we will just agree to dis agree. The personal moral issue can not be ignored, you can only lie to yourself for so long, you can fool some of the people etc. As far as "the police cannot arbitrarily decide they do not want to enforce laws " is pure bull shit, they do it every day, traffic laws, drug deals, prostitution, gambling, illegals etc. it is all at the cops whim at the time and the force they choose to use when they do enforce a law. Do some use better judgement yes, but only a fool would say that fellow cops don't know what other cops do and turn a blind eye, they same as politicians do. Say and believe what you want, but until the people have the same power/authority, we the people are screwed. Ignoring or turning a blind eye is what has gotten us into this situation. Meangreen's response is all the proof you need, he took it personal, knowing full well that what was said in that video is true, maybe not 100% across the board, but it's there and growing and his hands are tied to do much about it. There is a problem and to ignore it is to accept, IMO.
 

·
RIP Johnny
Joined
·
179 Posts
I started to write a long post about this, but the more I thought about it the more I decided not to write one. An officer has a duty not to enforce a law that is unconstitutional or immoral, but that decision is made by higher authorities that was put in place by laws and the people, not the officer on the street. But then again, these liberals won't understand this. And by the way I have nearly 30 years in law enforcement. Do I agree with ALL the laws on the books? No, but I took an oath to enforce them and to me that oath is important. If you don't like the way the laws are being enforced here, try living in another country and see how you like it then. Enough said
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,563 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
I started to write a long post about this, but the more I thought about it the more I decided not to write one. An officer has a duty not to enforce a law that is unconstitutional or immoral, but that decision is made by higher authorities that was put in place by laws and the people, not the officer on the street. But then again, these liberals won't understand this. And by the way I have nearly 30 years in law enforcement. Do I agree with ALL the laws on the books? No, but I took an oath to enforce them and to me that oath is important. If you don't like the way the laws are being enforced here, try living in another country and see how you like it then. Enough said
I don't want to live in komiefornia, chicago or nyc, I'll stay in America thank you. In America we have a Constitution and it gives the PEOPLE rights and laws or people that violate those rights can and should be held to uphold those rights, that includes LEO's. ENOUGH SAID, if you are allowed to think for yourself by law. Nazi germany enforced their laws too.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,972 Posts
I started to write a long post about this, but the more I thought about it the more I decided not to write one. An officer has a duty not to enforce a law that is unconstitutional or immoral, but that decision is made by higher authorities that was put in place by laws and the people, not the officer on the street. But then again, these liberals won't understand this. And by the way I have nearly 30 years in law enforcement. Do I agree with ALL the laws on the books? No, but I took an oath to enforce them and to me that oath is important. If you don't like the way the laws are being enforced here, try living in another country and see how you like it then. Enough said
I won't write a book, but would like to give you an alternative point of view. The United States Supreme Court opined:

The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land, and any statue, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:

" The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.

An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.

Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principals follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it . . .

A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one.

An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law.

Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.

No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
"

-- Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)

We have lines in the sand because the government is not always right and we've lost the advantage of having a representative government. Our forefathers wrestled with the same issue. An excerpt is in order:

"When does tyranny become tyranny? Is there a time when it is not only morally correct but the will of God for one to resist legally constituted authority? When does the Lord's "anointed" lose his anointing? When did it become God's will for America to throw off the yoke of Britain? Was it God's will at all?

Of all the questions we faced, this last was the one we dreaded the most. For a strong case could be made against America's ever having come out from under the mother country's authority. If God did intend this land to be a new Israel, then each major step in the implementation of this plan would have to conform to his righteousness. A holy end, no matter how sublime, could never justify unholy means.

The more we debated this, the more mired down we became. So, we prayed to be shown the way out of this mental swamp. And that same morning in Florida, in which we had been unable to discern the true nature of the Puritans call, the Holy Spirit went on to show us why America had to resist - why, for them to do anything less would have been the greatest disobedience. This part of the revelation began with a verse of Scripture coming to Peter's mind, which, when he looked it up was Galatians 5 : 1 and which proved to be the key to all that followed:

For freedom, Christ has set us free; stand fast, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery
." (The Light and the Glory by Peter Marshall and David Manuel Page 254 )

Government has a lot of power; but, what they lack is authority. "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yeild (sic)and government to gain ground." - Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, Paris, May 27, 1788

"The strength of the Constitution lies entirely in the determination of each citizen to defend it. Only if every single citizen feels duty bound to do his share in this defense are the constitutional rights secure."
― Albert Einstein

That is where I make my stand.
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top