Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: A name every American should become familiar with.

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    691

    A name every American should become familiar with.

    John Bad Elk



    John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529 (1900), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that an individual had the right to use force to resist an unlawful arrest and was entitled to a jury instruction to that effect.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,151

    U.S. Supreme Court Volume 177, Page 529 et seq. John Bad Elk v. United States

    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    Uh, that was like a hundred years ago dude. That don't apply in today's modern LE environment.
    RSMo 575.150.4. It is no defense to a prosecution pursuant to subsection 1 of this section that the law enforcement officer was acting unlawfully in making the arrest. However, nothing in this section shall be construed to bar civil suits for unlawful arrest.

    http://moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/57500001502.html
    http://moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/57500001501.html
    Ya know whats missing from this statute, and a great many others, that criminal penalties such as:

    RSMo 565.130 False Imprisonment (before 31 Dec 2016)
    RSMo 565.120 Felonious Restraint (before 31 Dec 2016)
    RSMo 565.110/120/130 Kidnapping (after 1 Jan 2017)

    Remember, a cop can kidnap you and that would not be determined until the unlawful arrest is actually found to have been unlawful. No cop shop is ever gunna charge a cop with kidnapping.
    "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

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Uh, that was like a hundred years ago dude. That don't apply in today's modern LE environment.Ya know whats missing from this statute, and a great many others, that criminal penalties such as:

    RSMo 565.130 False Imprisonment (before 31 Dec 2016)
    RSMo 565.120 Felonious Restraint (before 31 Dec 2016)
    RSMo 565.110/120/130 Kidnapping (after 1 Jan 2017)

    Remember, a cop can kidnap you and that would not be determined until the unlawful arrest is actually found to have been unlawful. No cop shop is ever gunna charge a cop with kidnapping.
    This is similar to a citizen's arrest. Relief of a wrongful citizen's arrest is usually the same as a wrongful arrest of a LEO ~ a civil matter. So if you have no money (can't get blood from a stone) one could, in theory, citizen arrest everyone/anyone that the citizen believes has violated a law that has a felony punishment and really not suffer anything. Of course, different states have different takes on citizen's arrest ~ so see yours for details.

  5. #5
    Regular Member decklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pacific, WA
    Posts
    764
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Uh, that was like a hundred years ago dude. That don't apply in today's modern LE environment.Ya know whats missing from this statute, and a great many others, that criminal penalties such as:

    RSMo 565.130 False Imprisonment (before 31 Dec 2016)
    RSMo 565.120 Felonious Restraint (before 31 Dec 2016)
    RSMo 565.110/120/130 Kidnapping (after 1 Jan 2017)

    Remember, a cop can kidnap you and that would not be determined until the unlawful arrest is actually found to have been unlawful. No cop shop is ever gunna charge a cop with kidnapping.
    If a hundred year old legal statement doesn't apply to modern times then what about a 223 year old amendment?
    "Loyalty above all else except honor. " -John Mahoney

    "A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." -Gerald R. Ford

  6. #6
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by decklin View Post
    If a hundred year old legal statement doesn't apply to modern times then what about a 223 year old amendment?
    ^^^
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff. State View Post
    John Bad Elk



    John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529 (1900), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that an individual had the right to use force to resist an unlawful arrest and was entitled to a jury instruction to that effect.
    My state has a specific statue that says one cannot resist; but I don't think it would pass muster even under our right to defend ourselves.

    Otherwise, any cop can walk up to you and shoot you in the head or choke you to death and you're supposed to say "thank you, may I have another?"??.

  8. #8
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by decklin View Post
    If a hundred year old legal statement doesn't apply to modern times then what about a 223 year old amendment?
    Read my post again and you just may, maybe, understand the point being made...I will not provide assistance.
    "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

  9. #9
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Read my post again and you just may, maybe, understand the point being made...I will not provide assistance.
    Here. I have no pressing engagements for the next few minutes. I'll do it.

    O.K., Timmy. Go get your big boy chair and have a seat.......

    At no point did he say the law is irrelevant because it is old. (Which is the meaning you read into it.

    He said "That don't (sic) apply in today's modern LE environment." meaning: Even though you may be in the right, you will most likely be killed, and the victors will write the history books.

    Whereupon, the truth of the matter will be "He resisted arrest, went for his gun, and was killed before he killed me."

    Nobody will blink an eye. Who will contradict the reasoning of this explanation? Not you. You're dead, remember? They could even have it on videotape. Video would probably even support the (known only to your cooling corpse) false narrative.

    No. In today's modern LE environment this antique law is exactly that: antique.

    It is still applicable. It is still relevant. It is still just.

    It is NOW more likely to get you killed with your face plastered on the news next to the words "attempted cop killer" and nobody the wiser.

    Ever heard of being "dead wrong"?

    Well, being "dead right" isn't much of an improvement.

    (Did I just coin a phrase?)

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,151
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    [ ... ] Well, being "dead right" isn't much of an improvement. (Did I just coin a phrase?)
    No. Bicyclists are well familiar with it as a consequence of might-makes-right.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    No. Bicyclists are well familiar with it as a consequence of might-makes-right.
    As the gun predates the bicycle by more than a few centuries, you'd think arbalists would have a richer pedigree of the concept than Lance Armstrong.

Posting Permissions

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