Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 98

Thread: Video share: When should you shoot a "cop"

  1. #1
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690

    Video share: When should you shoot a "cop"



    I hope this does not break forum rules.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Video share: When should you shoot a "cop"

    I didn't bother to read the initial post, but the subject matter demands comment.

    You should never shoot a cop. NEVER. By the time you get to the point where you can morally and legally shoot a thug wearing a policeman's uniform, he has long since stopped being a law enforcement officer and become a criminal from whom you are defending yourself.

    That will be a rare occurrence, but there are several anecdotes of it happening.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  3. #3
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    I didn't bother to read the initial post, but the subject matter demands comment.

    You should never shoot a cop. NEVER. By the time you get to the point where you can morally and legally shoot a thug wearing a policeman's uniform, he has long since stopped being a law enforcement officer and become a criminal from whom you are defending yourself.

    That will be a rare occurrence, but there are several anecdotes of it happening.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>
    Did you even bother to watch the video?
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  4. #4
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Lot's of good points made in the video.

    There are only a handful of people I know who are brave enough to even exercise minor rights. Like the video says history is full of the citizens loosing.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Roseburg
    Posts
    11
    I watched the video, interesting but not the first or second time I have heard this, having belonged to a cop observance group myself until recently.

    I can hear the narrators passion in the video however, ( every loves when a person says however) there are few concerns I had with it.
    Most crimes committed as a whole in other countries who have police are committed by their military. Police by design are ( so called) regulated by
    the letter of the law and even crooked cops can become entangled for stepping out of it. Not so with the military, a countries leader and often one man can control genocide performed by the military. I was not able to find any mass crimes committed by a countries police force. This is not to say they do not commit crime, but not to the extreme the video hints. Also there is no constitutional right for a citizen to kill another person or as the video suggest police. The term deadly force is not granted to the citizens of the united states. It is however granted to most enforcement branches in our government. The topic says when you should shoot a cop, I think the question is when can you legally do so? I could find no case when on duty officer can be shot and killed. These laws exist in the same way judges can not be sued and other similar laws that protect the rights of those enforcing the law. If it right or wrong to shoot a cop ? Hell I do not know, but I do know that a shot fired be it in defense or anger will be met by the legal system with huge resistance. The right to shoot an cop will be clouded by the death of a cop by an armed citizen is what the media and your neighbor are trained to think.

    Good video piece very interesting .

    Sig

  6. #6
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,276
    Small problem with his video~~If it is bad as he paints it, how did he get to post it? And has the government come to get him?

    Granted I give him some points, it is just a tad bit exaggerated.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    SNIP Lot's of good points made in the video.
    I agree that he makes a number of good points. But, his magnitudes are out of kilter. He leads with mass-killer tyrants to connect lethality of law and cops in jurisdictions where there are no mass killings.

    If his point is to show that it is occasionally necessary to kill a cop, he went about it all wrong. He could just show a few examples of cops showing AOJ on citizens and be done with it.

    If his point was to foment rebellion, why bring cops into it at all?

    If his point was to help break the mindset that it in never OK to kill a cop, he could just show a few examples of cops showing AOJ on citizens and be done with it.

    If his point was to get people to stop automatically believing the cop was the good guy every time a cop died, that is to say, put a chink in the armor against never killing a cop, he could just show examples of cops showing AOJ, etc.

    So, overall, I would say, first, I don't get. And, whatever his point is, there must be a better way to get it across.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  8. #8
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    I can fill pages with the errors and the insanity in this video.

    You don't have the right to kill any body. if you kill someone under any circumstances you are guilty of the elements of the crimes of manslaughter and/or murder. self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you must admit to those elements in order to use the defense. so when this guy says you have the right to kill cops, he's wrong.

    You may not kill police officers to stop an unreasonable search of your property, killing a cop means you would have to invoke justifiable homicide as a defense, and in nearly every state justifiable homicide only applies if your life or limb or that of your family are threatened. someone just rummaging through your car or your bag is not justification to blow them away. If the search of your property is illegal you have the right to challenge that in court. we settle issues like that with arguments, not bullets. That's exactly what the Indiana supreme court said BTW.

    "cop-killers" are not honorable people fighting for freedom, they're worthless cowards who don't want to go to prison. The idea that "cops" as we know cops were committing the atrocities of Nazi Germany is false. The german law enforcement structure had multiple arms, the "Cops" of Nazi Germany were the members of the "Ordnungspolizei" who conducted traffic enforcement, administrative law enforcement functions like permitting such, responded to service calls, and the like, also firefighting and other emergency services were handled by the "Ordnungspolizei" This force was not directly involved in the atrocities of Nazi germany, at least not to the best of my knowledge (some Ordnungspolizei units staffed by SS reservists did security work for concentration camps however, normally the units posted in poland, all of these policeman were really members of the SS and thus were actually soldiers of the Waffen and not ordinary police officers, the units I'm referring to were the domestic german units manned mainly by middle aged civilians or reservists who performed uniformed patrol and the like and were actual cops.). Atrocities were committed by active military units (of the Waffen SS, the general army or "Wehrmacht" wasn't usually involved in the death camps and oppression of the populace either) and by the "Gestapo" which was the "secret police" who dealt with political dissidents and assisted with the ethnic cleansing. it wasn't the lowly officer on the beat executing jews. the Ordnungspolizei structure was used after WW2, and in allied controlled germany, the remains of the regular police were used to conduct law enforcement after the nazi government was deposed (although they weren't allowed to carry guns by the allies until the 1950s) So saying your local sheriffs department is going to come and take you away to be oppressed and harmed by an organized tyrannical structure on the magnitude of Nazi germany has little historical basis.
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 11-11-2012 at 08:20 PM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  9. #9
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Completely aside from the posted topic,
    does anyone else see the far-left cop in the still picture in post #1 pointing his pistol at the several officers ahead of him in line?
    And does it look like his finger is on the trigger?
    Maybe his training officer needs to do some work there...

  10. #10
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    I can fill pages with the errors and the insanity in this video.

    You don't have the right to kill any body. if you kill someone under any circumstances you are guilty of the elements of the crimes of manslaughter and/or murder. self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you must admit to those elements in order to use the defense. so when this guy says you have the right to kill cops, he's wrong.

    You may not kill police officers to stop an unreasonable search of your property, killing a cop means you would have to invoke justifiable homicide as a defense, and in nearly every state justifiable homicide only applies if your life or limb or that of your family are threatened. someone just rummaging through your car or your bag is not justification to blow them away. If the search of your property is illegal you have the right to challenge that in court. we settle issues like that with arguments, not bullets. That's exactly what the Indiana supreme court said BTW. Not true in Washington state. If the cop is acting outside the law and is committing a felony on your person, then he/she is just another citizen at that point and so it's legal to slay them.

    "cop-killers" are not honorable people fighting for freedom, they're worthless cowards who don't want to go to prison. Oh? The cowards are the ones who hide behind a badge knowing that if they kill you "by mistake" they are getting a paid vacation and a retirement. The idea that "cops" as we know cops were committing the atrocities of Nazi Germany is false. How is it not true? I might give you a little leeway and instead point out that they are just as criminal as the crown's police force just before the revolution. There as at least one ruling that you have no right to refuse police entry into your home. The police can search you in the name of a "Terry Stop" without a warrant, etc. As for the NAZI reference it could be the same reference to the former Soviet Russia, "papers please, you must have your papers to be out in the public viewing." Translating that to let's see your ID The german law enforcement structure had multiple arms, the "Cops" of Nazi Germany were the members of the "Ordnungspolizei" who conducted traffic enforcement, administrative law enforcement functions like permitting such, responded to service calls, and the like, also firefighting and other emergency services were handled by the "Ordnungspolizei" This force was not directly involved in the atrocities of Nazi germany, at least not to the best of my knowledge (some Ordnungspolizei units staffed by SS reservists did security work for concentration camps however, normally the units posted in poland, all of these policeman were really members of the SS and thus were actually soldiers of the Waffen and not ordinary police officers, the units I'm referring to were the domestic german units manned mainly by middle aged civilians or reservists who performed uniformed patrol and the like and were actual cops.). Atrocities were committed by active military units (of the Waffen SS, the general army or "Wehrmacht" wasn't usually involved in the death camps and oppression of the populace either) and by the "Gestapo" which was the "secret police" who dealt with political dissidents and assisted with the ethnic cleansing. it wasn't the lowly officer on the beat executing jews. the Ordnungspolizei structure was used after WW2, and in allied controlled germany, the remains of the regular police were used to conduct law enforcement after the nazi government was deposed (although they weren't allowed to carry guns by the allies until the 1950s) So saying your local sheriffs department is going to come and take you away to be oppressed and harmed by an organized tyrannical structure on the magnitude of Nazi germany has little historical basis. The Holocaust, as taught in schools, has little to no historical basis.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjBs...eature=related <ask a Jew the truth.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm8U...ctr=1352700486 <ask a guy who was there.

    What did Amerika do? http://www.historyonthenet.com/WW2/j...ment_camps.htm <what we accused Hitler of doing.

    The point I got from the video was, that if someone is engaged in criminal activity(ies) it does not matter if they wear a uniform or not.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  11. #11
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjBs...eature=related <ask a Jew the truth.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm8U...ctr=1352700486 <ask a guy who was there.

    What did Amerika do? http://www.historyonthenet.com/WW2/j...ment_camps.htm <what we accused Hitler of doing.
    .
    Don't even go there, That is 100% off topic and I will not entertain this for half a second more then it takes to type.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  12. #12
    Regular Member Lasjayhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    294
    Not sure that's off topic or not. What with the NDAA and all. I paid for my coffee with cash this morning, how do I know they are not about to throw me in Guantanamo?

  13. #13
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Lasjayhawk View Post
    Not sure that's off topic or not. What with the NDAA and all. I paid for my coffee with cash this morning, how do I know they are not about to throw me in Guantanamo?
    No he just posted links advocating holocaust denial. is what i was referring to.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    SNIP You don't have the right to kill any body. if you kill someone under any circumstances you are guilty of the elements of the crimes of manslaughter and/or murder. self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you must admit to those elements in order to use the defense. so when this guy says you have the right to kill cops, he's wrong.
    Easy there. Even a slow knuckle-dragger like me can tell the video narrator was talking about a moral or natural right, not a legal right.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    SNIP You may not kill police officers to stop an unreasonable search of your property.
    Your list of unreasonable searches was a little short. Night-time no-knock raids indistinguishable from a home invasion might very well be adequate justification. Also, you omit castle doctrine, whether provided by statute or common law, which tends to work against the need to establish AOJ as a defense.

    Sooner or later, more cops are gonna get shot doing these no-knock and night-time raids. There is a reason search warrants were served during daylight in times gone by. And, law-enforcement announced themselves clearly before making entry.

    With all that said, I think the OP video narrator will fail to persuade anybody not already persuaded. He makes good points, but he strings them together awkwardly.
    Last edited by Citizen; 11-12-2012 at 03:45 AM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  16. #16
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Well,,,

    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    Completely aside from the posted topic,
    does anyone else see the far-left cop in the still picture in post #1 pointing his pistol at the several officers ahead of him in line?
    And does it look like his finger is on the trigger?
    Maybe his training officer needs to do some work there...
    Yeah,,, cop #1 is aiming right for the face of cop #2,,, and cop #2 is giving cop #1 the "are you fjuck1ing kidding me!!!" stare!!!

    also note the blue smoke above the gun to the left of the house...
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I agree that he makes a number of good points. But, his magnitudes are out of kilter. He leads with mass-killer tyrants to connect lethality of law and cops in jurisdictions where there are no mass killings.

    If his point is to show that it is occasionally necessary to kill a cop, he went about it all wrong. He could just show a few examples of cops showing AOJ on citizens and be done with it.

    If his point was to foment rebellion, why bring cops into it at all?

    If his point was to help break the mindset that it in never OK to kill a cop, he could just show a few examples of cops showing AOJ on citizens and be done with it.

    If his point was to get people to stop automatically believing the cop was the good guy every time a cop died, that is to say, put a chink in the armor against never killing a cop, he could just show examples of cops showing AOJ, etc.

    So, overall, I would say, first, I don't get. And, whatever his point is, there must be a better way to get it across.
    What I gather from the video is the frustration people are starting to feel from the pressure of an increasing police state, you are right about your thoughts on the video, I think this was done by a younger person full of passion yet not as focused as a more experienced person.

    A few of the good points I can draw from the video.

    We have allowed the police state to happen. I see the "killing a cop" as hyperbole to make a point of discussion of at what point do we start resisting tyranny. The second amendment is about resisting tyranny, who will our government use to institute this tyranny , the same people they use to do it now, the police.

    So to me the hard cold reality of resisting tyranny may very well mean defending ourselves against police. But as the video shows and as I feel people in general won't until too late in the game.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    (snip) I think this was done by a younger person full of passion yet not as focused as a more experienced person.
    Larken Rose

    Larken Rose is an anti-government writer who was unjustly sentenced to 15 months in federal prison for being a tax protestor. While in prison, he wrote a book called Kicking the Dragon. His novel, The Iron Web, is about a dystopian future that could well be where we're heading. His other works include How to Be a Successful Tyrant, and Theft by Deception. He also produced the classic YouTube video, I'm Allowed to Rob You.
    He also did a video at Porcfest this year


  19. #19
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    When? Don't know and I do not want to find out. What I do know is that your life expectancy diminishes very rapidly if you do "shoot a cop." If assuming room temperature is your goal.....I have no such goal.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Easy there. Even a slow knuckle-dragger like me ....
    I never thought of you as slow ... I thought you were a fast knuckle-dragger lol


    Really though, you have a right to defend yourself and your property..how far you can go depends on where you live.

    In many states you don't have to allow unfettered access into your house .. I think my local police have learned that lesson the hard way ...

    But most folks are not like me ...

    The loss of blood by tyrants and patriots is a necessary occasional thing for freedom .. paraphrasing T. Jefferson ... put me down for 2 pints !

    And most of the time, force is not even needed to prevent this stuff .... if they know you are prepared, they'll move onto another victim, just like criminals do..
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 11-12-2012 at 03:09 PM.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    It is also good from time to time to post the actual quotes in their context.

    http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki...28Quotation%29

    "I do not know whether it is to yourself or Mr. Adams I am to give my thanks for the copy of the new constitution. I beg leave through you to place them where due. It will be yet three weeks before I shall receive them from America. There are very good articles in it: and very bad. I do not know which preponderate. What we have lately read in the history of Holland, in the chapter on the Stadtholder, would have sufficed to set me against a Chief magistrate eligible for a long duration, if I had ever been disposed towards one: and what we have always read of the elections of Polish kings should have forever excluded the idea of one continuable for life. Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusets? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it's motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion.[1] The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusets: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen yard in order. I hope in god this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted." - Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, Paris, 13 Nov. 1787
    Jefferson was saying that even if a rebellion is started in error, it is a good thing. I must disagree with him there. If anyone enters into a rebellion, they need to be damned sure that they are essentially right in the facts. King George abused us for years and repeated attempts were made to remedy the situation before the Founders watered that tree. At the time of the watering, they pledged their lives and fortunes to what was illegal until and unless they won. Thank God they won.

    When posters here call for revolution, explicitly or implicitly, they need to remember that.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    It is also good from time to time to post the actual quotes in their context.

    http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki...28Quotation%29



    Jefferson was saying that even if a rebellion is started in error, it is a good thing. I must disagree with him there. If anyone enters into a rebellion, they need to be damned sure that they are essentially right in the facts. King George abused us for years and repeated attempts were made to remedy the situation before the Founders watered that tree. At the time of the watering, they pledged their lives and fortunes to what was illegal until and unless they won. Thank God they won.

    When posters here call for revolution, explicitly or implicitly, they need to remember that.
    Oh! Finally! I have longed for the opportunity to meet the man wiser than Jefferson! At last my heartfelt prayers are answered!

    Give me a break, Eye. Jefferson says right in the letter that the people cannot all and always be well informed. And, in the face of propagandizing media and lying government you expect them to be essentially damn sure in their facts?

    Oh, and there's a difference between rebellion and revolution.

    -----------------

    Its government! It is always seeking more power, always infringing and denying liberties. A rebellion would be very likely legitimate without any facts in view. Even if the people don't know what the government or is up to, the government does.
    Last edited by Citizen; 11-12-2012 at 05:39 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  23. #23
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    Larken Rose



    He also did a video at Porcfest this year


    Thanks for the info learn something new every day.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  24. #24
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    Larken Rose



    He also did a video at Porcfest this year

    Sounds like a real nutjob to me. hmmm first he gets sent to prison for being a tax cheat, now he's glorifying killing police officers. hmmm
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 11-12-2012 at 10:04 PM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  25. #25
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    Sounds like a real nutjob to me. hmmm first he gets sent to prison for being a tax cheat, now he's glorifying killing police officers. hmmm

    The founding fathers were smugglers and tax cheats. Just something to think about.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •