^When you have no argument.
Cops should learn the law they enforce and stop violating the rights they swore to uphold and protect.
Notice you're arguing against the peoples rights for those who blatantly violate them.
I didn't ignore anything… you can't argue against what I say so you substitute your own nonsense.
When a cop says "I don't care about this first amendment nonsense" as he arrests someone for exercising their constitutional right… it's not a mistake… it's a crime.
When a cop attacks someone not violating the law to unlawfully arrest them… it's not a mistake, it's a crime.
When a cop enters a home without lawful authority, it's not a mistake, it's a crime.
>leftists
Guess again.
>this one video showed something, must be real and applies to all cops
It's real, and it's an example. I never said use force against ALL cops… only the ones unlawfully arresting you.
Cops KNOWINGLY violate rights all the time… get your head out of the sand.
What you call the "current way" is the peoples unalienable rights being violated. The USSC is lawless and has violated the constitution multiple times. Shit runs down hill.
>That's why the current way -> get arrested -> don't resist -> clean it up later actually makes sense, because otherwise it's simply anarchy with lost of dead people, which you - the leftard wants, but most people don't.
Sorry I forgot to add. The "current way" as you call where they "clean it up later" is judges giving themselves immunity where you CAN'T sue them and get it before a jury, even for a malicios ruling, and where you CAN'T sue a cop and get it to a jury, unless the court says it's ok… both in blatant violation of the peoples 7th amendment rights.
Yeah… they "clean it up" alright.
No you projected it.
It's a well known case dipshit. It's an example. Want more?
You don't like the peoples right to use force against unlawful arrest, but what you like means fuck all. Same for the court. It's the peoples RIGHT. Why do you think you rank above the peoples rights?
Cops attacking people unlawfully should absolutely face consequences…but that doesn't change the peoples rights.
No I never said anyone should act on their feelings… you're the one arguing your feelings. I KNOW when my rights are being violated… so do many others.
You want rule… not freedom.
The peoples rights are not anarchy. Self defense is not anarchy. Your idea of order is not everyones idea of order.
Tyranny is not order.
An unlawful arrest is an attack.
The people, the Free Press that CRUSHES the tyrants… have youtube full of videos of cops ATTACKING people to unlawfully arrest them, for no crime. Whether you like it or not… the people have the right to use force against them.
The "current way" lets the cops off to do it again. The courts just throw the taxpayers money at their victims and call it a day.
See you can't argue against what I say so you substitute your own nonsense.
Like I said… I decide when to exercise my right… a jury decides if I was right.
See, substituting your own nonsense. You can't argue against what I actually say.
I'm well aware of what tyranny is.
Yet you wont stop doing it. You don't argue against what I say… you argue against the nonsense you substitute for what I say.
A cop violating rights is not a good cop. There's no such thing as a good cop in the United States. The courts have been violating rights since before they were born… they swore to protect those rights and they choose to serve the corrupt courts/government.
When lies and projection is all you've got kmao
>>a cop making a MISTAKE deserves death or being injured
Look who's arguing feelings.
It's the peoples RIGHT to use force. Your feelings, a cops feelings, the courts feelings… none of those trump the peoples rights.
I didn't ignore it, I talked about it.
Yes, literally every court in the united states, the entire judicial… is lawless and corrupt.
Do you understand your feelings don't trump peoples rights?
Let's look at FACTS.
The right to resist an unlawful arrest existed in common law before this nation was founded.
The 9th amendment to the US Constitution protects common law rights not enumerated in the constitution.
The US Supreme Court recognized the peoples right to resist unlawful arrest with force in John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529 (1900).
Everyone who swore an oath to uphold/protect the constitution swore an oath to uphold and protect THAT right.
Conspiracy against rights is a FEDERAL CRIME under 18 USC 241.
Depriving a right under color of ANY law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom is a FEDERAL CRIME under 18 USC 242.
The US Supreme Court, in Bradley v. Fisher, 80 US (13 Wall.) 335 (1872), created Judicial Immunity, a form of sovereign immunity, where judges cannot be sued for their judicial acts, even when done "maliciously and corruptly".
The US Supreme Court, in Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) the court created "qualified immunity" for cops, claiming that they should not face financial liability if they acted in good faith and with probable cause under a law they believed was valid at the time.
The US Supreme Court, in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) expanded qualified immunity, eliminating the old subjective "good faith" element (which asked whether the official acted with malicious intent). Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) the court expanded qualified immunity, eliminated the old subjective "good faith" element (which asked whether the official acted with malicious intent. Now government employes are shielded from civil damages liability unless their conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." The court claims unless there is a previous case under similar circumstances where an officer was found to have violated rights by performing a specific action, then the officer could not "reasonably know" performing that action is a violation of rights.
And it ALL blatantly violates the 7th amendment, stopping a federal civil case before it makes it to a jury, because judges say it can never make it to a jury. Authority they were not only never granted, but specifically forbidden by the 7th amendment.
Opps sorry for double pasting
See, substituting your own bullshit because you can't argue against the facts I posted.
Opps for >>25099011
^No argument.
Keep crying about peoples rights you don't agree with.
You're crying… you're putting your feelings above the rights of others and constitutional authority of the United States. against facts. The fact is, it's a right protected by the 9th amendment. You just don't like it.
Who have I threatened?
I've never been arrested or even suspected of a crime that I'm aware of.
Cops ARE terrorists. Not all are wicked, but they all serve the wicked.
Yes there is an actual real problem.
Do you care only about yourself and not others? Should I not care that OTHERS rights are being violated? That OTHERS are being abused?
What does that video have to do with the peoples RIGHT you deny? You keep arguing your feelings and you want me to put feelings above rights.
Sorry forgot to address the cops are terrorists.
ALL cops are PART of the lawless system that is terrorizing people and violating their rights. They ALL share in aiding in that.
We the People also share in it for letting it happen.
No and I'm not going to. FEELINGS don't trump the peoples rights.
That cop still aided and helped prop up lawlessness.
What lies? I've given FACTS.
I don't take money from government, I also don't serve money. Money is not my God.
I never said the system is just cops and judges.
Other people have been unlawfully arrested… my world does not revolve around me.
Still arguing your feelings over facts, over rights, over ACTUAL law.
Curious, are you a domestic enemy or foreign enemy to the Constitution of the United States?
So you admit you support the lawless government violating the constitution and rights of the people?
The rights of the people do fit… the violation of them by domestic enemies does not.
nonsense and projection are all you've got kmao
>youtube
You don't understand a Free Press huh?
>They rely on the MSM to keep the narrative going but TECH is entrenching on their controls.
The people have multiple platforms to spread what government is REALLY doing.
You're so full of shit kmao
True or false… the 7th amendment to US constitution guarantees the right to a jury for every federal civil case (case at common law) where the amount is greater than $20 to every US citizen?
True or false… in Bradley v. Fisher, 80 US (13 Wall.) 335 (1872), the US Supreme Court created Judicial Immunity, a form of sovereign immunity, where judges cannot be sued for their judicial acts, even when done "maliciously and corruptly" in violation of the 7th amendment?
Youtube is a platform where the people disseminate information of public interest to the public… you know… news.
FREE PRESS.
KMAO
Lies and projection are all you've got as usual kmao.
Let me know when you can discuss it without projecting nonsense and lying.
Indeed they can see who argues with nonsense projection and lies, and who states facts.
>More nonsense and projection.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/177/529/
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-9/
>saluting one flag
>>25099341
>HANDS UP LADY YOU'RE UNDER ARREST NOW SPREAD YOUR LEGS AND PUT YOUR HANDS SOMEWHERE I CAN'T SEE THEM, LMFAO
Rule me harder daddy!!!