this is amazing
11-06-2009, 11:43 AM
#12
Super Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 2,532
And rightfully so. I deplore the direction that our federal government has taken. However, I fully support the efforts of police in my community. I can only wonder at the motivation of those who choose to resist.
11-06-2009, 01:57 PM
#13
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
As long as it ain't your door they are issuing the no knock warrant on right? Also the point of the article was and the point I am making is that in many cases, no matter what you do you are "resisting". Our difference in opinion is that I don't believe these people are resisting at all, at least not a large percentage.
So to answer your question would I resist? If your definition of resist is ask why I am being detained then yes, if you definition of resistance is assaulting the officer then no.
11-06-2009, 02:04 PM
#14
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Man Detained for Displaying “Don’t Tread on Me” Bumper Sticker
Dr. Archie Jones May 06, 2009
Our friends at The Patriot Depot just received a call from Rosemarie in Ball, Louisiana alerting Patriot Depot that her brother-in-law was stopped by small town Louisiana police and detained by the roadside for half an hour. A background check was conducted to determine whether he was a member of an "extremist" group. Why? Her brother-in-law (name not disclosed for privacy) had purchased and displayed a conservative"Don't Tread on Me" bumper sticker on his car.
The bumper sticker is based on the famous flag designed by American Revolution era general and statesman Christopher Gadsden. The yellow flag featured a coiled diamondback rattlesnake ready to strike, with the slogan "Don't Tread on Me!" underneath it. Benjamin Franklin helped make the rattlesnake a symbol of Americans' reluctance to quarrel but vigilance and resolve in defense of their rights. By 1775 when Gadsden presented his flag to the commander-in-chief of the Navy, the rattlesnake was a symbol of the colonies and of their need to unite in defense of threats to their God-given and inherited rights. The flag and the bumper sticker symbolize American patriotism, the need to defend Americans' rights, and resistance to tyranny's threats to American liberty. Those threats included-and include-illegal taxation, profanation of Americans' rights, and violation of the fundamental principles of American law.
The notorious Department of Homeland Security memo, which was apparently based on the infamous Missouri State Police Report that described supporters of presidential candidates Bob Barr, Ron Paul, and Chuck Baldwin as "militia"-type potential extremists and potential terrorists, is not the first effort of leftist radicals to slander their political opponents as "extremists." Some observers have noted that similar "reports" emerged during the Clinton administration. But "liberals" and other leftists have been calling defenders of traditional American limited, constitutional government, free enterprise, and individual liberty "extremists" since at least the 1964 election.
The political left's attempts to establish a false equivalence between genuine left wing extremists and those who oppose the left's assault on our culture, law, and liberty is more than propaganda to fool the ignorant and manipulate public opinion. Combined with the power of government, it is an attempt to harass, intimidate, and silence all political opposition-and probably an attempt to demonize them as a prelude to governmental oppression and persecution. Keep in mind that the First Amendment states,
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Small town police misled by phony left wing "reports" are bad enough. Federal government agencies and their armed agents under the direction of leftist radicals are exponentially worse. They will tread on us. The time has come to let our voices be heard!
11-06-2009, 02:59 PM
#15
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
It's the typical you are either with us or against us bullshit that almost every american has adapted to in the last few years. I'm not allowed to question the actions of a police officer or police department without calling all cops "dirty" or being completely against cops, the flip side of that is that you have to justify the actions of these officers no matter how oppressive or unconstitutional they are in order to "support law enforcement'. Personally I don't feel it necessary for my liberty to destroyed in order for me to be kept safe, "give me liberty or give me death" ring a bell? It is better to be free then oppressed IMHO, in other words if the cost of "safety" is my freedom, then I would prefer to take my chances. HOWEVER, I don't believe that it is necessary to ignore the constitution in order to secure my safety. I also don't believe it's too much to ask that the people I employ to uphold the law are held accountable to those very laws. While many people who read this will believe that I don't like cops (and that's fine) that isn't the case at all, I have many friends and even relatives that are cops. I support my local police officers in upholding the law, I do not support their right to shoot an argumentative drunk because he won't get out of the car (read the story I posted) and for the record at one point that guy was my "neighbor" so to speak as I used to live in Everett, WA.
I am essentially saying, that anyone in any arm of the law that does not feel they are bound to uphold the constitution and the local laws should not be in law enforcement. Plain and simple.
Questioning authority only casts a dark shadow on it if it's actions are unacceptable to begin with.
I am essentially saying, that anyone in any arm of the law that does not feel they are bound to uphold the constitution and the local laws should not be in law enforcement. Plain and simple.
Questioning authority only casts a dark shadow on it if it's actions are unacceptable to begin with.
11-06-2009, 03:14 PM
#17
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
11-06-2009, 03:16 PM
#18
Super Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 5,425
As long as it ain't your door they are issuing the no knock warrant on right? Also the point of the article was and the point I am making is that in many cases, no matter what you do you are "resisting". Our difference in opinion is that I don't believe these people are resisting at all, at least not a large percentage.
So to answer your question would I resist? If your definition of resist is ask why I am being detained then yes, if you definition of resistance is assaulting the officer then no.
So to answer your question would I resist? If your definition of resist is ask why I am being detained then yes, if you definition of resistance is assaulting the officer then no.
I'll see if I can find the particular one I'm thinking of...
11-06-2009, 07:11 PM
#19
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: California
Posts: 22,465
It's the typical you are either with us or against us bullshit that almost every american has adapted to in the last few years. I'm not allowed to question the actions of a police officer or police department without calling all cops "dirty" or being completely against cops, the flip side of that is that you have to justify the actions of these officers no matter how oppressive or unconstitutional they are in order to "support law enforcement'. Personally I don't feel it necessary for my liberty to destroyed in order for me to be kept safe, "give me liberty or give me death" ring a bell? It is better to be free then oppressed IMHO, in other words if the cost of "safety" is my freedom, then I would prefer to take my chances. HOWEVER, I don't believe that it is necessary to ignore the constitution in order to secure my safety. I also don't believe it's too much to ask that the people I employ to uphold the law are held accountable to those very laws. While many people who read this will believe that I don't like cops (and that's fine) that isn't the case at all, I have many friends and even relatives that are cops. I support my local police officers in upholding the law, I do not support their right to shoot an argumentative drunk because he won't get out of the car (read the story I posted) and for the record at one point that guy was my "neighbor" so to speak as I used to live in Everett, WA.
I am essentially saying, that anyone in any arm of the law that does not feel they are bound to uphold the constitution and the local laws should not be in law enforcement. Plain and simple.
Questioning authority only casts a dark shadow on it if it's actions are unacceptable to begin with.
I am essentially saying, that anyone in any arm of the law that does not feel they are bound to uphold the constitution and the local laws should not be in law enforcement. Plain and simple.
Questioning authority only casts a dark shadow on it if it's actions are unacceptable to begin with.
well said.
seems like around here, the police are happy to tell me where to park, but when it comes to actually solving a crime, nothing happens. criminals have more guns than i do (they think, my neighbor is a gun dealer, so that assumption is wrong)
